The Archaeology of The NYABG

The
New York
AfricAN
BuriAl
GrouNd
U.S. General Services Administration
Vol. 2
The Archaeology of the New York African Burial Ground

Part I
Editors: Perry, Howson, and Bianco
iSBN: 0-88258-254-2
9 780882 582542
HOWARD
UNIVERSITY
The New York AfricAN BuriAl GrouNd:

unearthing the African Presence in colonial New York
Volume 2
The Archaeology of the

New York African Burial Ground
Part I
Editors: Warren R. Perry, Jean Howson, and Barbara A. Bianco
The Archaeology of the New York African Burial Ground, Part 1 (2009), was
published formerly as the New York African Burial Ground Archaeology
Final Report, Volume 1 (2006), and posted on the World Wide Web at http://
www.africanburialground.gov/ABG_FinalReports.htm. The Archaeology of
the New York African Burial Ground, Part 1 will be posted on the Web site
of the National Park Service at http:www.nps.gov.
Application has been filed for Library of Congress registration.
Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations
expressed in this material are those of the authors and do
not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. General Services
Administration or Howard University.
Published by Howard University Press
2225 Georgia Avenue NW, Suite 720
Washington, D.C. 20059
18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 1 2 3 4 5
ISBN 0-88258-254-2
978-0-88258-254-2
Howard Universitys New York African Burial Ground Project
was funded by the U.S. General Services Administration under
Contract No. GS-02P-93-CUC-0071
Technical editing and graphics support by Statistical
Research, Inc. Layout and design by Simpson & Convent.
Typeset and printed in the United States of America.
Printed on acid-free paper.
Cover Images:
Detail of the Maerschalk Plan (Francis Maerschalk, 1754)
Artifacts from the New York African Burial Ground (Photographs by Jon Abbott):
Enameled cuff link face, Burial 371, Catalog No. 1875-B.001.
Bead Type 12, Burial 340, Catalog No. 01651-B.79.
Oval turquoise enamel face, Burial 211, Catalog No. 1186 -B.001.
Pins, Burial 12, Catalog Nos. 253-B.001, .002.
Ring, copper alloy with glass insets, Burial 310, Catalog No. 1486-B.001.
Button, bone, turned. Burial 171, Catalog No. 931-B.002.
Cast silver pendant, Burial 254, Catalog No. 1243-B.001.
Burial 335 (Photography by Dennis Seckler)
Cover design by Star Bullock + Associates, Mark A. Bartley
Contributors
Director for Archaeology

Warren R. Perry, Ph.D., Central Connecticut State
University
Associate Director for Archaeology
Jean Howson, Ph.D.
Laboratory Director
Leonard G. Bianchi, M.A.
Research Associate
Barbara A. Bianco, Ph.D.
Historical and Archaeological
Consultants
E. Kofi Agorsah, Ph.D., Portland State University
Steven Barto, M.A., M.L.S., New York Municipal
Archives
Christopher R. DeCorse, Ph.D., Syracuse
University
Augustin F. C. Holl, Ph.D., University of Michigan
at Ann Arbor
Meta F. Janowitz, Ph.D.
Research Assistants
Shannon Mahoney, M.A.
Ruth Mathis, M.A.
Janet L. Woodruff
Archaeological Technicians
Jean-Marie Cerasale
Tarik Holmes
Tamara Kelly
Iciar Lucena Narvaez
Allison Manfra
Amy Page
Paula Saunders
Cristine Whibby
Digital Mapping
Robert Bethea, M.A.
Marques Roberts
Percival Taylor, M.A.
Ed Zeltmann, The RBA Group
Faunal and Floral Analysts
Patricia Fall, Ph.D., Arizona State University
Gerald K. Kelso, Ph.D.
Lisa Lavold-Foote, Arizona State University
Marie-Lorraine Pipes
Leslie Raymer, R.P.A., New South Associates
Advisory Review Board
Francis P. McManamon, Ph.D., RPA, Chief
Archaeologist, National Park Service
Theresa A. Singleton, Ph.D., Syracuse University
Diana diZerega Wall, Ph.D., City University of
New York City College
African Burial Ground Project
Directors
Michael L. Blakey, Ph.D. (College of William and
Mary), Scientific Director
Edna Greene Medford, Ph.D. (Howard University),
Director for History
Warren R. Perry, Ph.D. (Central Connecticut State
University), Director for Archaeology
Sherrill D. Wilson, Ph.D., Director, Office of Public
Education and Interpretation
Lesley M. Rankin-Hill, Ph.D. (University of
Oklahoma), Director for Skeletal Biology
Alan H. Goodman, Ph.D. (Hampshire College),
Director for Chemical Studies
Fatimah L. C. Jackson, Ph.D. (University of
Maryland), Director for Genetics
IV Contributors
Jean Howson, Ph.D., Associate Director for
Archaeology
Leonard G. Bianchi, M.A., Archaeology Laboratory
Director
Mark Mack, M.A. (Howard University), Cobb
Laboratory Director
The New York African Burial Ground

Administration/Management
O. Jackson Cole, Ph.D. (Howard University),
Executive in Charge
James A. Donaldson, Ph.D. (Howard University),
Project Manager
VI Contents
Artifact Photographs..............................................................................................................................................................27
Replicas..................................................................................................................................................................................28
September 11, 2001......................................................................................................................................................................28
Reburial........................................................................................................................................................................................30
2. Documentary Evidence on the Origin and Use of the African Burial Ground
by Jean Howson, BarbaraA. Bianco, and Steven Barto......................................................................................................35
Origin of the African Burial Ground...............................................................................................................................................35
Documentary Chronology of the African Burial Ground, 16501783............................................................................................43
Closing of the African Burial Ground, 17841795.........................................................................................................................52
African Funeral Practices in New Amsterdam/New York................................................................................................................58
Population................................................................................................................................................................................60
Burial Logistics and Labor.........................................................................................................................................................62
Announcing the Death............................................................................................................................................................62
Preparing the Body for Burial.................................................................................................................................................63
Selecting a Grave Site and Digging the Grave: New Yorks African Sextons..............................................................................64
Transporting the Body to the Cemetery and Conducting Graveside Rites................................................................................65
Marking and Visiting the Grave...............................................................................................................................................66
3. The Archaeological Site
by Jean Howson and Leonard G. Bianchi..............................................................................................................................67
The Landscape, the Site, Postcemetery Development, and Site Preservation...............................................................................67
The Historical Landscape...........................................................................................................................................................67
The Archaeological Site in Relation to the Historic Cemetery.....................................................................................................70
Impacts to Graves during the Cemeterys Use............................................................................................................................73
Postcemetery Development......................................................................................................................................................74
The Earliest Street and Lot Development and the Fill..............................................................................................................74
Building Construction in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries..........................................................................................76
Damage Sustained during the Project...........................................................................................................................................77
Overall Site Stratigraphy...............................................................................................................................................................81
Condition of Graves.......................................................................................................................................................................82
Preservation Assessment..............................................................................................................................................................84
Graves Remaining in Place at the Site...........................................................................................................................................85
4. Relative Dating
by Jean Howson, Warren R. Perry, Augustin F. C. Holl, and Leonard G. Bianchi...............................................................87
Site Features Relevant for Chronology...........................................................................................................................................87
The Fence Lines.........................................................................................................................................................................87
The Ditches................................................................................................................................................................................90
Animal-Bone Dumping.............................................................................................................................................................91
Pottery Waste Dumping............................................................................................................................................................92
Artifact Dating..............................................................................................................................................................................93
Burial Stratigraphy and Spatial Patterning....................................................................................................................................94
Coffin Shape..................................................................................................................................................................................97
Results of Analysis: The Temporal Grouping of Burials...................................................................................................................97
The Late Group........................................................................................................................................................................102
Contents VII
The Early Group.......................................................................................................................................................................103

The Middle and Late-Middle Groups.......................................................................................................................................105
5. Overview of Mortuary Population, Burial Practices, and Spatial Distribution
by Warren R. Perry and Jean Howson................................................................................................................................107
The Mortuary Population............................................................................................................................................................107
Burial Practices...........................................................................................................................................................................109
Coffin Burial............................................................................................................................................................................110
Head-to-West Orientation.......................................................................................................................................................110
Supine Extended Body Position...............................................................................................................................................115
Shrouding...............................................................................................................................................................................115
Individual Interment and Shared and Clustered Graves...........................................................................................................116
Clothing, Personal Adornment, and Other Items.....................................................................................................................120
Grave Markers.........................................................................................................................................................................120
Additional Observations on Internal Geography..........................................................................................................................122
Distinctive Womens Graves in the Southeastern Area of the Site............................................................................................123
Conclusion...................................................................................................................................................................................127
6. The Early Group
by Warren R. Perry, Jean Howson, and Augustin F. C. Holl...............................................................................................129
The Town.....................................................................................................................................................................................129
The Population............................................................................................................................................................................131
Census.....................................................................................................................................................................................131
Mortuary Sample....................................................................................................................................................................131
Mortuary Material Culture...........................................................................................................................................................131
Spatial Distribution.....................................................................................................................................................................133
The Western Concentration.....................................................................................................................................................135
The Central Concentration.......................................................................................................................................................143
The Eastern Concentration.......................................................................................................................................................146
Unique and Unusual Burials........................................................................................................................................................146
South-Headed and Coffinless Burials......................................................................................................................................146
Burial 247: A Secondary Burial................................................................................................................................................147
Burial 404: Empty Coffin..........................................................................................................................................................147
7. The Middle Group
by Warren R. Perry, Jean Howson, and Augustin F. C. Holl...............................................................................................149
The Town.....................................................................................................................................................................................149
The Population............................................................................................................................................................................151
Census.....................................................................................................................................................................................151
Mortuary Sample....................................................................................................................................................................151
The Western Area....................................................................................................................................................................165
The West-Central Area.............................................................................................................................................................166
The East-Central Area..............................................................................................................................................................168
The Lot 18 Area.......................................................................................................................................................................168
Volume 2, Part 1 The Archaeology of the New York African Burial Ground
VIII Contents
The Southeast Area.................................................................................................................................................................169

Burials25 and 32: A Violent Death and a Shared Grave...........................................................................................................169
Burial 175: A Secondary Burial................................................................................................................................................171
Burials74 and 129: Empty Coffins...........................................................................................................................................171
South-Headed and East-Headed Burials..................................................................................................................................171
Burials142, 144, and 149: A Triple Grave.................................................................................................................................171
8. The Late-Middle Group
by Warren R. Perry, Jean Howson, and Augustin F. C. Holl............................................................................................ 173
The Town.....................................................................................................................................................................................173
The Population............................................................................................................................................................................174
Census.....................................................................................................................................................................................174
Mortuary Sample....................................................................................................................................................................174
The Western Area....................................................................................................................................................................184
The West-Central Area.............................................................................................................................................................184
The East-Central Area..............................................................................................................................................................185
The Southeast Area.................................................................................................................................................................185
Decorated Coffins....................................................................................................................................................................186
Burial 392................................................................................................................................................................................188
9. The Late Group
by Warren R. Perry, Jean Howson, and Augustin F. C. Holl.............................................................................................191
The Town.....................................................................................................................................................................................191
The Population............................................................................................................................................................................193
Census.....................................................................................................................................................................................193
Mortuary Sample....................................................................................................................................................................194
Coffins and Burialswithout Coffins..........................................................................................................................................198
Other Artifacts.........................................................................................................................................................................205
Orientation..............................................................................................................................................................................205
Rows.......................................................................................................................................................................................205
Paired Burials..........................................................................................................................................................................206
Gendered Space......................................................................................................................................................................206
Isolated Infants.......................................................................................................................................................................206
The Area of the Animal-Bone Dump........................................................................................................................................207
Area within Lot 17...................................................................................................................................................................207
Burial 183: Head-to-East, Possible Painted Coffin....................................................................................................................207
Burial 194: Wooden Grave Marker...........................................................................................................................................208
Burial 196: Displaced Legs and an Opened Coffin....................................................................................................................208
Burialswith Skeletal Elements Displaced: Dismemberment and Dissection............................................................................209
Contents IX
10. Coffins
by Jean Howson and Leonard G. Bianchi with the assistance of Iciar Lucena Narvaez and JanetL. Woodruff........213
Presence/Absence of Coffins.......................................................................................................................................................213
Coffin Production and Provision..................................................................................................................................................214
Coffin Variation at the New York African Burial Ground...............................................................................................................217
Coffin Shape............................................................................................................................................................................217
Coffin Size...............................................................................................................................................................................218
Coffin Wood.............................................................................................................................................................................221
Coffin Construction..................................................................................................................................................................222
Nail Locations.......................................................................................................................................................................224
Screws..................................................................................................................................................................................232
Coffin Decoration....................................................................................................................................................................239
Burial 101: The Heart or Sankofa Symbol..............................................................................................................................239
Burial 176: Handled Coffin with Tack-Edged Lid....................................................................................................................240
Burial 332: HW...................................................................................................................................................................240
Possible Painted Coffins...........................................................................................................................................................241
The Coffin Wood and Hardware Assemblage: Condition, Treatment, Chain of Custody............................................................243
Wood....................................................................................................................................................................................243
Iron Hardware and Coffin Furniture......................................................................................................................................244
Disposition...........................................................................................................................................................................245
11. Pins and Shrouding
by Jean Howson with the assistance of Shannon Mahoney and Janet L. Woodruff....................................................247
A Profile of the Burials with Pins.................................................................................................................................................247
Sex, Age, and Time..................................................................................................................................................................247
Analysis of Pin Placement.......................................................................................................................................................248
Pins and Shrouds in Eighteenth-Century New York.....................................................................................................................258
The Pin Assemblage and Associated Cloth..................................................................................................................................260
Recovery, Condition and Treatment, Chain of Custody.............................................................................................................260
Methodology..........................................................................................................................................................................263
Manufacture and Dating.........................................................................................................................................................263
12. Buttons and Fasteners
by Leonard G. Bianchi and Barbara A. Bianco with the assistance of ShannonMahoney..........................................265
Burials with Buttons, Cuff Links, and Aglets................................................................................................................................265
Clothing and Fasteners in Historical Context...............................................................................................................................269
The Button, Cuff Link, and Aglet Assemblage and Associated Cloth............................................................................................285
Recovery, Condition and Treatment, Chain of Custody.............................................................................................................285
Typology.................................................................................................................................................................................287
Button/Fastener Inventory by Individual Burial.......................................................................................................................291
13. Beads and Other Adornment
by Barbara A. Bianco, Christopher R. DeCorse, and Jean Howson................................................................................321
A Profile of Burials with Personal Adornment.............................................................................................................................321
Infants and Young Children with Personal Adornment............................................................................................................325
Adults with Personal Adornment............................................................................................................................................325
X Contents
Problematic Cases...................................................................................................................................................................328
Discussion...............................................................................................................................................................................328
Personal Adornment in Historical Context...................................................................................................................................330
The Bead Assemblage.................................................................................................................................................................333
Recovery, Condition and Treatment, and Chain of Custody......................................................................................................334
Methodology and Definitions..................................................................................................................................................334
Manufacture, Age, and Origin.................................................................................................................................................340
Typology.................................................................................................................................................................................341
The Cowrie Shells........................................................................................................................................................................341
The Rings and Other Jewelry.......................................................................................................................................................341
Recovery, Condition and Treatment, Definitions, and Chain of Custody...................................................................................341
Manufacture, Age, and Origin.................................................................................................................................................342
Inventory................................................................................................................................................................................345
14. Coins, Shells, Pipes, and Other Items
by Warren R. Perry and Janet L. Woodruff......................................................................................................................349
Burials with Coins, Shells, Pipes, and Other Items.......................................................................................................................349
The Coin, Shell, Pipe, and Other Item Assemblage......................................................................................................................349
Recovery, Condition and Treatment, and Chain of Custody......................................................................................................349
Coins.......................................................................................................................................................................................351
Shells and Coral.......................................................................................................................................................................354
Pipes.......................................................................................................................................................................................357
Other Items.............................................................................................................................................................................359
Clay Ball with Copper-Alloy Band.........................................................................................................................................359
Cluster of Rings and Pins.......................................................................................................................................................359
Glass Sphere.........................................................................................................................................................................360
Knives...................................................................................................................................................................................360
Calcite Crystal, Quartz Disc, and Mica Schist Fragment.........................................................................................................362
Crockery................................................................................................................................................................................363
Nails and Tacks......................................................................................................................................................................363
Ox Shoe................................................................................................................................................................................364
Peach Pit...............................................................................................................................................................................364
Possible Floral Tributes................................................................................................................................................................365
15. Summary and Conclusions
by Warren R. Perry, Jean Howson, and Barbara A. Bianco............................................................................................367
Ancestors, Descendants, and the Research Agenda.....................................................................................................................367
Location and Dating of the Excavated Site...................................................................................................................................368
Burial Practices within the Excavated Site...................................................................................................................................369
Individuals and Communities......................................................................................................................................................371
Ancestors, Cultural Roots, and the Transformation of African to African American Identities.......................................................373
Future Research..........................................................................................................................................................................373
Epilogue
by Warren R. Perry.............................................................................................................................................................375
List of Figures
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Figure 7.
Figure 8.
Figure 9.
Figure 10.
Figure 11.
Figure 12.
Figure 13.
Figure 14.
Figure 15.
Figure 16.
Figure 17.
Figure 18.
Figure 19.
Figure 20.
Figure 21.
Figure 22.
Figure 23.
Figure 24.
Figure 25.
Figure 26.
Figure 27.
Figure 28.
Figure 29.
Figure 30.
Figure 31.
Figure 32.
Lower Manhattan locator map: African Burial Ground excavation site.........................................................................2

Excavation site, Block 154............................................................................................................................................4
Backhoe clearing.........................................................................................................................................................7
Excavation shelter........................................................................................................................................................7
Archaeologists working under lights...........................................................................................................................7
Construction of the 290 Broadway Federal building....................................................................................................7
Site plan..................................................................................................................................................... pocket map
Example of a digital photographic series of an artifact..............................................................................................29
Replicas of African Burial Ground straight pin recovered in the field..........................................................................31
Manatus Map (1639).................................................................................................................................................36
Castello Plan (1660)...................................................................................................................................................36
Trinity Churchyard headstones...................................................................................................................................37
African and European land grants near the African Burial Ground.............................................................................39
Van Borsum Patent with Governor Colves signature, 1673........................................................................................41
Lyne-Bradford Plan(1730).........................................................................................................................................45
The Carwitham Plan (1730).......................................................................................................................................46
Mrs. Buchnerds Plan (17321735)............................................................................................................................47
Grim Plan (17421744) ............................................................................................................................................49
Maerschalk Plan (1754).............................................................................................................................................50
Ratzer Map (1767).....................................................................................................................................................51
British Headquarters Map (1782)..............................................................................................................................53
Calk Hook Farm partition map (1787)........................................................................................................................54
Directory Plan (1789).................................................................................................................................................55
Van Borsum Patent partition map (1795)..................................................................................................................56
African Society petition signatures, 1795...................................................................................................................57
Taylor-Roberts Plan (1797)........................................................................................................................................59
Europeans and Africans, 1700s..................................................................................................................................61
African Burial Ground vicinity in 1989 (Sanborn Map)...............................................................................................68
Montressor plan (1766).............................................................................................................................................69
Collect Pond and surrounding land (1798).................................................................................................................69
African Burial Ground National Historic Landmark District: Elk Street........................................................................70
Site location overlaid on Lyne-Bradford Plan (1730)..................................................................................................71
XII List of Figures
Figure 33. Site location overlaid on the Maerschalk Plan (1754)................................................................................................72

Figure 34. Site location overlaid on the Ratzer Map (1767)........................................................................................................72
Figure 35. Burial 153: in situ photograph of disturbance from privy..........................................................................................76
Figure 36. Burial 297: in situ photograph of disturbance from privy...........................................................................................76
Figure 37. Post-cemetery development: Perris Map (1853)........................................................................................................77
Figure 38. Post-cemetery development: Robinson and Pidgeon Atlas (1893)............................................................................78
Figure 39. Post-cemetery development: Bromley Map (1934)...................................................................................................79
Figure 40. Burial 97: in situ photograph of disturbance of concrete wall....................................................................................81
Figure 41. Burial 213: in situ photograph of disturbance from brick drain..................................................................................81
Figure 42. Burial 362: in situ drawing of disturbance from concrete footing...............................................................................82
Figure 43. Republican Alley: in situ photograph of excavation of grave surface..........................................................................83
Figure 44. Schematic diagram of elevations of burials................................................................................................................83
Figure 45. Location of possible fence along north side of cemetery (1767)................................................................................88
Figure 46. Site features and burials............................................................................................................................................89
Figure 47. Burials in the vicinity of the tannery dump................................................................................................................91
Figure 48. Examples of diagrammed stratigraphic series...........................................................................................................95
Figure 49. Coffin shapes represented at the African Burial Ground.............................................................................................97
Figure 50a. Site plan: temporal groups, western area..................................................................................................................98
Figure 50b. Site plan: temporal groups, west-central area...........................................................................................................99
Figure 50c. Site plan: temporal groups, east-central and Lot 18 areas.......................................................................................100
Figure 50d. Site plan: temporal groups, eastern area.................................................................................................................101
Figure 51. Age distribution.......................................................................................................................................................108
Figure 52. Adult sex distribution..............................................................................................................................................108
Figure 53. Burial 226: in situ drawing and photograph of infant with pins and beads..............................................................109
Figure 54. Orientation of burials with heads oriented to the west, by temporal group.............................................................111
Figure 55. Position of the sun on the horizon at sunset in lower Manhattan............................................................................112
Figure 56. Adult/subadult distribution by temporal group.......................................................................................................119
Figure 57. Burials marked with cobbles at the southwest corner of the excavated cemetery...................................................121
Figure 58. Burial 18: excavated grave with stone marker in place............................................................................................121
Figure 59. Burial 47: vertical stone slab....................................................................................................................................121
Figure 60. Burial 23: apparent stone marker............................................................................................................................122
Figure 61. Burial 23: apparent stone marker and nearby cobbles.............................................................................................122
Figure 62. Row-like alignment of graves..................................................................................................................................124
Figure 63. Area (southeast corner of site) with womens graves ..............................................................................................125
Figure 64. Burial 371: in situ drawing of cuff link face at upper arm.........................................................................................125
Figure 65. Burial 375: in situ photograph.................................................................................................................................126
Figure 66. Burial 375: in situ drawing of clay ball with copper band.........................................................................................126
Figure 67. Burial 340: in situ photograph of beads in pelvic area..............................................................................................127
Figure 68a. Site plan: Early Group, overview..............................................................................................................................136
Figure 68b. Site plan: Early Group, western area........................................................................................................................137
Figure 68c. Site plan: Early Group, west-central area.................................................................................................................138
Figure 68d. Site plan: Early Group, east-central and Lot 18 areas...............................................................................................139
Figure 68e. Site plan: Early Group, eastern area.........................................................................................................................140
Figure 69. Age distribution, Early Group...................................................................................................................................141
List of Figures XIII
Figure 70. Adult sex distribution, Early Group...........................................................................................................................141

Figure 71. Burial clusters: southwest portion of the site...........................................................................................................142
Figure 72. Burial 121 and 202: in situ photograph of shared grave shaft..................................................................................144
Figure 73. Burial 120: in situ photograph of displaced remains................................................................................................144
Figure 74. Burial 177 and nearby childrens graves...................................................................................................................145
Figure 75. Burial 207 and nearby Early Group burials...............................................................................................................145
Figure 77a. Site plan: Middle Group, overview...........................................................................................................................158
Figure 77b. Site plan: Middle Group, western area.....................................................................................................................159
Figure 77c. Site plan: Middle Group, west-central area..............................................................................................................160
Figure 77d. Site plan: Middle Group, east-central and Lot 18 areas............................................................................................161
Figure 77e. Site plan: Middle Group, eastern area......................................................................................................................162
Figure 78. Age distribution, Middle Group................................................................................................................................163
Figure 79. Adult sex distribution, Middle Group.......................................................................................................................163
Figure 80. Burial clusters: southwest portion of the site...........................................................................................................165
Figure 81. Burial 96/94: surrounding cluster............................................................................................................................167
Figure 82. Burial clusters: west-central area of the site............................................................................................................167
Figure 83. Burial 25: in situ photograph of musket ball in rib area...........................................................................................170
Figure 84. Burial 32 and 25: in situ photographs......................................................................................................................170
Figure 86. Burials 142, 144, and 149: in situ photograph.........................................................................................................172
Figure 87a. Site plan: Late-Middle Group, overview...................................................................................................................178
Figure 87b. Site plan: Late-Middle Group, western area.............................................................................................................179
Figure 87c. Site plan: Late-Middle Group, west-central area......................................................................................................180
Figure 87d. Site plan: Late-Middle Group, east-central and Lot 18 areas....................................................................................181
Figure 87e. Site plan: Late-Middle Group, eastern area..............................................................................................................182
Figure 88. Age distribution, Late-Middle Group.......................................................................................................................183
Figure 89. Adult sex distribution, Late-Middle Group...............................................................................................................183
Figure 90. Burial 101:in situ photograph of coffin lid decoration..............................................................................................186
Figure 91. Burial 101: possible reading of the year 1769 on coffin lid....................................................................................186
Figure 92. Burial 101: in situ drawing of skeletal remains........................................................................................................187
Figure 93. Burial 176: in situ photograph of iron tacks.............................................................................................................187
Figure 94. Burial 176: in situ photograph of coffin handles......................................................................................................187
Figure 95. Burial 332: in situ photograph of coffin lid decoration.............................................................................................188
Figure 96. Burial 332: in situ photograph of skeletal remains...................................................................................................188
Figure 97. Burial 392: in situ photograph of head-to-east burial..............................................................................................189
Figure 98. Locations of free black households and slaveholding households, 1790..................................................................194
Figure 99a. Site plan: Late Group burials, overview....................................................................................................................199
Figure 99b. Site plan: Late Group burials, western area..............................................................................................................200
Figure 99c. Site plan: Late Group burials, west-central area.......................................................................................................201
Figure 99d. Site plan: Late Group burials, east-central and Lot 18 areas.....................................................................................202
Figure 100. Age distribution, Late Group....................................................................................................................................203
Figure 101. Adult sex distribution, Late Group............................................................................................................................203
XIV List of Figures
Figure 102. Burial 183: in situ photograph of exposed coffin lid.................................................................................................208

Figure 103. Burial 194: in situ photograph of coffin boards........................................................................................................208
Figure 105. Burial 151: in situ drawing of skeletal remains........................................................................................................210
Figure 106. Burial 364: in situ drawing of skeletal remains .......................................................................................................210
Figure 108. Childrens and infants coffins: shape by age............................................................................................................219
Figure 109. Childrens and infants coffins: shape by temporal group..........................................................................................219
Figure 110. Coffin lengths..........................................................................................................................................................220
Figure 111. Coffin length and calculated stature of the deceased...............................................................................................220
Figure 112. Relationship of coffin size to stature........................................................................................................................221
Figure 113. Burial 376: in situ drawing of unusually wide coffin................................................................................................222
Figure 114. Burials 387 and 388: in situ drawings of unusually narrow coffins...........................................................................222
Figure 115. Frequencies of identified coffin woods.....................................................................................................................224
Figure 116. Burials 23 and 68: coffins with bottom board nailed into sideboard........................................................................225
Figure 117. Burial 352: rendering of coffin bottom with cross-bracing.......................................................................................225
Figure 118. Burial 392: coffin lid with cross-bracing at each end................................................................................................225
Figure 119. Burial 196: rendering of coffin bottom with cross-bracing.......................................................................................226
Figure 120. Burial 194: in situ photograph of wood marker nailed to coffin head......................................................................226
Figure 121. Burial 321: in situ drawing of coffin with screws at footboard.................................................................................233
Figure 122. Burial 101: in situ drawing of heart-shaped motif on coffin lid................................................................................240
Figure 123. Burial 101: X-ray of tacks used to form heart-shaped motif.....................................................................................241
Figure 124. Burial 176: in situ drawing of coffin lid....................................................................................................................242
Figure 125. Burial 176: reconstruction of coffin lid and iron coffin handles................................................................................242
Figure 126. Burial 176: X-ray of coffin handle.............................................................................................................................242
Figure 127. Burial 176 and 90: composite drawing of coffin handle...........................................................................................242
Figure 128. Burial 332: coffin lid with iron nails forming HW and 38..........................................................................................243
Figure 129. Burial 14: in situ photograph of pin locations..........................................................................................................257
Figure 130. Burial 183: in situ drawing of pin locations..............................................................................................................257
Figure 131. Mezzotint (1748) showing pins on womans bodice.................................................................................................259
Figure 132. Burial 12: copper-alloy pins.....................................................................................................................................261
Figure 133. Burial 415: pin with attached textile, from cranium................................................................................................262
Figure 134. Burial 104: textile from possible shroud...................................................................................................................262
Figure 135. Burial 230: textile from possible shroud that had adhered to a coin........................................................................262
Figure 136. Mens everyday breeches, circa 1765-1820..............................................................................................................271
Figure 137. Working womans petticoat and short gown, circa 1770-1820................................................................................271
Figure 138. Quilted petticoat, circa 17701775..........................................................................................................................271
Figure 139. New York City merchants linen order, 1746.............................................................................................................282
Figure 140. Drawstring casing on womans gown, circa 1800-1810...........................................................................................283
Figure 141. Salesmans button sample card, circa 1780..............................................................................................................284
Figure 142. Shirtsleeve with octagonal cuff links, circa 17301760...........................................................................................285
Figure 143. Diagram of procedure for covering a button with fabric...........................................................................................287
Figure 144. Burial 6: buttons associated with a mans coat or jacket...........................................................................................291
Figure 145. Burial 6: gilt, copper-alloy button (anchor device)...................................................................................................292
List of Figures XV
Figure 146. Burial 6: gilt, copper-alloy button (anchor device)....................................................................................................292

Figure 147. Diagram of anchor device.........................................................................................................................................292
Figure 148. Burial 10: buttons associated with a mans coat or jacket.........................................................................................293
Figure 149. Burial 10: copper-alloy button, face and back..........................................................................................................294
Figure 150. Burial 10: copper-alloy button shank.......................................................................................................................294
Figure 151. Burial 10: copper-alloy button shank.......................................................................................................................294
Figure 152. Burial 10: plain-weave wool textile fragment..........................................................................................................294
Figure 153. Burial 22: aglet........................................................................................................................................................294
Figure 154. Burial 37: turned bone button with drilled center hole............................................................................................295
Figure 155. Burial 158: circular shaped, gilt copper-alloy cuff links............................................................................................295
Figure 156. Burial 171: turned bone button...............................................................................................................................295
Figure 157. Burial 171: turned bone button...............................................................................................................................296
Figure 158. Burial 171: copper-alloy button ring........................................................................................................................296
Figure 159. Burial 181: in situ drawings of buttons in the hip area.............................................................................................296
Figure 160. Burial 181: copper-alloy button, with zinc and nickel..............................................................................................297
Figure 161. Burial 181: copper-alloy button, with zinc and nickel..............................................................................................297
Figure 162. Burial 181: copper-alloy button, face and back........................................................................................................297
Figure 163. Burial 181: copper-alloy button, with bone back.....................................................................................................298
Figure 164. Burial 181: copper-alloy button, with bone back.....................................................................................................298
Figure 165. Burial 181: bone and copper-alloy button...............................................................................................................298
Figure 166. Burial 181: bone and copper-alloy button with flattened shank..............................................................................298
Figure 167. Burial 191: copper-alloy button with possible surface decoration...........................................................................299
Figure 168. Burial 203: leather-covered wood buttons, with copper-alloy shank.......................................................................300
Figure 169. Burial 203: front of wood button.............................................................................................................................300
Figure 170. Burial 203: back of wood button..............................................................................................................................300
Figure 171. Burial 203: copper-alloy button shank fragment.....................................................................................................300
Figure 172. Burial 203: button with copper-alloy shank.............................................................................................................301
Figure 173. Burial 213: aglet with hair adhering........................................................................................................................301
Figure 174. Burial 214: copper-alloy button back, front and back..............................................................................................301
Figure 175. Burial 214: possible iron button shank.....................................................................................................................302
Figure 176. Burial 238: copper-alloy cuff links, front and back...................................................................................................302
Figure 177. Burial 238: decorative motif on cuff link..................................................................................................................302
Figure 178. Burial 238: bone button...........................................................................................................................................303
Figure 179. Burial 243: cast copper-alloy button with possible decoration................................................................................303
Figure 180. Burial 250: copper-alloy button with central raised nipple......................................................................................303
Figure 181. Burial 257: bone buttons with center holes.............................................................................................................304
Figure 182. Burial 259: in situ drawing of buttons at ribs, pelvic area, and knees.......................................................................304
Figure 183. Burial 259: copper-alloy buttons, with ridged and milled decoration......................................................................304
Figure 184. Burial 259: tin-plated, copper-alloy button.............................................................................................................305
Figure 185. Burial 259: copper-alloy button with boss and wire loop shank...............................................................................305
Figure 186. Burial 259: possible leather-covered wood buttons.................................................................................................305
Figure 187. Burial 259: copper-alloy button shanks...................................................................................................................306
Figure 188. Burial 259: textile retrieved from coffin wood sample.............................................................................................306
Figure 189. Burial 259: copper-alloy button and wool textile with buttonhole..........................................................................306
XVI List of Figures
Figure 190. Burial 313: bone button, with offset rim..................................................................................................................307

Figure 192. Burial 325: gilt copper-alloy button and shank (fragments)....................................................................................308
Figure 193. Burial 326: cast hollow-dome copper-alloy button, face and back..........................................................................308
Figure 194. Burial 326: cast hollow-dome copper-alloy button..................................................................................................309
Figure 195. Burial 326: copper-alloy button...............................................................................................................................309
Figure 196. Burial 333: bone buttons.........................................................................................................................................309
Figure 198. Burial 341: octagonal copper-alloy cuff links, front and back...................................................................................310
Figure 199. Burial 342: aglet......................................................................................................................................................311
Figure 200. Burial 366: copper-alloy button with alpha loop shank, front and side....................................................................311
Figure 201. Burial 368: in situ photograph of possible grommet /fastener at throat..................................................................312
Figure 202. Burial 371: domed-metal button with associated textile.........................................................................................312
Figure 203. Burial 379: copper-alloy loop shank.........................................................................................................................313
Figure 204. Burial 379: copper-alloy domed button...................................................................................................................313
Figure 205. Burial 385: turned bone buttons with drilled center hole........................................................................................313
Figure 206. Burial 392: in situ drawing of buttons at knees and hips..........................................................................................314
Figure 207. Burial 392: bone buttons.........................................................................................................................................314
Figure 211. Burial 392: mended bone button.............................................................................................................................315
Figure 213. Burial 392: wool buttonhole....................................................................................................................................315
Figure 214. Burial 392: copper-alloy cuff link.............................................................................................................................316
Figure 215. Burial 398: octagonal copper-alloy button or cuff link, possible loop shank............................................................316
Figure 216. Burial 403: pewter button, front and side................................................................................................................316
Figure 217. Burial 403: copper-alloy button, front and back......................................................................................................317
Figure 218. Burial 403: cast two-piece copper-alloy button, front and back...............................................................................317
Figure 219. Burial 403: textile....................................................................................................................................................317
Figure 220. Burial 405: white-metal Brittania button with copper-alloy shank.........................................................................317
Figure 221. Burial 415: in situ drawing of buttons at knees and hips..........................................................................................318
Figure 222. Burial 415: hollow cast copper-alloy button, front and back....................................................................................319
Figure 223. Burial 415: hollow cast copper-alloy button............................................................................................................319
Figure 224. Burial 415: hollow cast copper-alloy button............................................................................................................319
Figure 225. Burial 415: copper-alloy button with leather, front and back...................................................................................320
Figure 226. Burial 415: textile....................................................................................................................................................320
Figure 227. Burial 415: wool textile (preserved buttonhole)......................................................................................................320
Figure 228. Burial 415: wool textile............................................................................................................................................320
Figure 229. Burial 340: in situ drawing of beads at hips and right wrist.....................................................................................326
Figure 230. Burial 337: in situ photograph of ring at throat........................................................................................................327
Figure 231. Bead Types 1 and 3..................................................................................................................................................337
Figure 232. Bead Type 2.............................................................................................................................................................337
Figure 233. Bead Type 4.............................................................................................................................................................337
List of Figures XVII
Figure 234. Bead Type 5.............................................................................................................................................................337

Figure 235. Bead Type 6.............................................................................................................................................................337
Figure 236. Bead Type 7.............................................................................................................................................................337
Figure 237. Bead Type 8.............................................................................................................................................................338
Figure 238. Bead Type 9 and 15..................................................................................................................................................338
Figure 239. Bead Type 10............................................................................................................................................................338
Figure 240. Bead Type 11............................................................................................................................................................338
Figure 241. Bead Type 12............................................................................................................................................................338
Figure 242. Bead Type 13............................................................................................................................................................338
Figure 243. Bead Type 14............................................................................................................................................................339
Figure 244. Cowrie shell.............................................................................................................................................................341
Figure 245. Burial 254: reconstruction of silver pendant............................................................................................................343
Figure 246. Burial 71: ring with plain band................................................................................................................................345
Figure 247. Burial 115: ring with plain band..............................................................................................................................345
Figure 248. Burial 398: ring with plain band..............................................................................................................................345
Figure 249. Burial 242: ring with glass insets.............................................................................................................................345
Figure 250. Burial 310: ring with glass insets.............................................................................................................................346
Figure 251. Burial 186: glass and wire filigree ornament...........................................................................................................346
Figure 252. Burial 254: silver pendant........................................................................................................................................346
Figure 253. Burial 332: possible earring or bent pin fragment....................................................................................................346
Figure 254. Burial 211: turquoise enamel cuff link or button face..............................................................................................347
Figure 255. Burial 371: turquoise enamel cuff link faces with surface decoration.......................................................................347
Figure 256. Burial 135: in situ photograph of coin in left eye socket...........................................................................................352
Figure 257. Burial 135: copper-alloy George II halfpenny...........................................................................................................352
Figure 258. Burial 135: George II halfpenny X-ray and reference coin.........................................................................................352
Figure 259. Burial 214: copper-alloy coin...................................................................................................................................353
Figure 262. Burial 242: in situ photograph of copper coin in left eye socket...............................................................................354
Figure 263. Burial 22: in situ photograph of clamshell on left clavicle........................................................................................355
Figure 264. Burial 348: in situ photograph of clamshell on coffin lid..........................................................................................355
Figure 265. Burial 365: in situ photograph of shell and iron artifact on coffin lid.......................................................................356
Figure 266. Burial 376: coral.......................................................................................................................................................356
Figure 267. Burial 340: clay pipe................................................................................................................................................357
Figure 268. Burial 158: clay pipe bowl with mark IW...............................................................................................................358
Figure 269. Burial 165: in situ photograph of clay pipe stem and bowl......................................................................................358
Figure 270. Burial 165: clay pipe stem and bowl........................................................................................................................358
Figure 271. Burial 375: ceramic ball with embossed copper-alloy band.....................................................................................359
Figure 272. Burial 147: in situ drawing of rings and pins............................................................................................................360
Figure 273. Burial 147: copper-alloy rings..................................................................................................................................360
Figure 274. Burial 410: amber-colored glass sphere...................................................................................................................360
Figure 275. Burial 214: in situ drawing of knife and coin............................................................................................................361
Figure 276. Burial 214: in situ photograph of knife handle.........................................................................................................361
Figure 277. Burial 214: knife handle...........................................................................................................................................361
XVIII List of Figures
Figure 278. Burial 48: X-ray of knife blade..................................................................................................................................362

Figure 279. Burial 55: crystal......................................................................................................................................................362
Figure 280. Burial 289: rose quartz disc......................................................................................................................................362
Figure 281. Burial 135: mica schist disc......................................................................................................................................363
Figure 282. Burial 328: in situ photograph of stoneware vessel..................................................................................................363
Figure 283. Burial 15: ox shoe....................................................................................................................................................365
Figure 284. Burial 15: X-ray of ox shoe.......................................................................................................................................365
Figure 285. Burial 15: drawing of ox shoe..................................................................................................................................365
Figure 286. West African Sankofa symbol...................................................................................................................................372
List of Tables
Table 1. Assigned Burial Numbers with No Discrete Human Remains Associated.........................................................................9

Table 2. Excavated Burials with Age, Sex, and Location .............................................................................................................11
Table 3. Explanation of Catalog Numbers...................................................................................................................................25
Table 4. Data Tables in Archaeological Database.........................................................................................................................28
Table 5. Items Selected for Replication.......................................................................................................................................30
Table 6. Items Not Recovered after World Trade Center Collapse, September 11, 2001...............................................................32
Table 7. Artifact Categories, Counts, and Current Disposition.....................................................................................................33
Table 8. Church Affiliation of a Sample of New York City Slaveholding Households, 1703...........................................................38
Table 9. Black Population of New York County, 16981800........................................................................................................60
Table 10. Streets Laid Out through the African Burial Ground.......................................................................................................75
Table 11. Damage to Known Burials Caused by Historic Development.........................................................................................80
Table 12. Preservation Values Used for Burials..............................................................................................................................85
Table 13. Artifact-Based Termini Post Quem.................................................................................................................................94
Table 14. Presence or Absence of Coffins....................................................................................................................................110
Table 15. Angle of Sunset for Each Month of the Year.................................................................................................................112
Table 16. Deaths Recorded for Reformed Dutch Church and Trinity Church in the Eighteenth Century, by Month.......................113
Table 17. Comparison of Potential Seasonality Data from Pollen and Burial Orientation............................................................114
Table 18. Arm Position...............................................................................................................................................................115
Table 19. Shared Graves and Possible Shared Graves at the New York African Burial Ground......................................................117
Table 20. Sources of Imports of Enslaved Africans into New York Colony, 17011726................................................................130
Table 21. Deaths Reported for Blacks, August to December, 1731..............................................................................................132
Table 22. Black Population by Age and Sex, 17031731............................................................................................................133
Table 23. Early Group Burials......................................................................................................................................................134
Table 25. Middle Group Burials...................................................................................................................................................152
Table 27. Late-Middle Group Burials..........................................................................................................................................176
Table 29. Late Group Burials.......................................................................................................................................................195
Table 30. Late Group Burials without Coffins, by Sex and Age....................................................................................................204
Table 31. Coffin Presence or Absence, by Sex, Age, and Temporal Group....................................................................................214
Table 32. Coffins for Africans Made by Joshua Delaplaine, 17531756......................................................................................216
Table 33. Coffin Prices, 1796.......................................................................................................................................................217
XX List of Tables
Table 34. Coffin Shape, by Age Category....................................................................................................................................218

Table 35. Categories of Coffin Wood...........................................................................................................................................223
Table 36. Burials with Identified Coffin Wood.............................................................................................................................227
Table 37. Number of Coffins Made of Each Wood Type, by Temporal Group.................................................................................232
Table 38. Number of Coffins Made of Each Wood Type, by Age Category....................................................................................232
Table 39. Number of Coffins Made of Each Wood Type, by Shape................................................................................................233
Table 40. Coffin Nail Locations....................................................................................................................................................234
Table 41. Burials with Coffin Screws...........................................................................................................................................238
Table 42. Presence of Pins, by Age Category and Sex..................................................................................................................248
Table 43. Burials with Pins and Pin Locations.............................................................................................................................249
Table 44. Burials with Pins by Age, Sex, and Temporal Group.....................................................................................................256
Table 45. Pin Frequencies, by Temporal Period and Sex..............................................................................................................256
Table 46. Number of Burials with One or More Pins in the Four Body Areas, by Sex....................................................................258
Table 47. Textile Fragments Recovered (Not in Association with Buttons) .................................................................................261
Table 48. Burials with Buttons, Cuff Links, and Aglets................................................................................................................266
Table 49. Burials of Men with Buttons or Cuff Links, by Temporal Group Assignment.................................................................269
Table 50. Clothing Worn by Enslaved Persons Who Escaped from New York City Households as Described in Newspaper
Advertisements, by Date.........................................................................................................................................................272
Table 51. Textile and Leather Fragments Associated with Clothing Fasteners.............................................................................286
Table 52. Button Types Recovered at the African Burial Ground..................................................................................................288
Table 53. Burials with Personal Adornment................................................................................................................................322
Table 54. Adornments and Cowries Imported into Africa, 16621713, by Region......................................................................332
Table 55. Bead Types at the African Burial Ground......................................................................................................................335
Table 56. Paste Rings with Central and Side Insets from North American Archaeological Contexts............................................343
Table 57. Burials with Coins, Shells, Pipes, and Other Items.......................................................................................................350
Table 58. Burials with Possible Floral Tributes............................................................................................................................366
Foreword
In 1991, during the excavation phase for the construction of the Federal Building now seen at 290
Broadway, New York City, a cemetery was uncovered
containing human remains of Africansmost were
enslaved, some freewho lived, worked, and died
under inhumane conditions in colonial New York. This
discovery, the largest bioarchaeological site of its kind,
sparked heightened public awareness of an African
heritage in the northern states of colonial America.
An outcome of this awareness was the publics desire
for amending and correcting the history of colonial
New York during that period to reflect more accurately
the lives and culture of these forgotten Africans and
people of African descent and their contributions and
roles in economic development. Several initiatives,
sponsored by the General Services Administration
on behalf of the American people, were launched to
accomplish this goal.
The initiative to conduct historical and scientific
studies of the remains and artifacts excavated at the
site was entrusted to Howard University. There, Dr.
Michael L. Blakey, now at the College of William and
Mary, designed and implemented a comprehensive,
interdisciplinary research programthe New York
African Burial Ground Projectto address questions in three main areas: history, archaeology, and
skeletal biology. As scientific director of the project, he assembled an international team of scholars,
professionals, graduate and undergraduate students,
technical staff members, and cultural specialists for
various parts of the study.
The New York African Burial Ground: Unearthing

the African Presence in Colonial New York serves
as the culminating work of this project, reporting
the research findings. This multivolume series covers broadly a contextualized historical perspective,
details of the archaeological discoveries, and descriptions of the skeletal biology of the unearthed human
remains. Each volume documents and validates the
lives of African Americans ancestors who lived and
worked in colonial New York. Included in this work
are detailed descriptions of the burials excavated,
complete with drawings, figures, and tables, as well
as a comprehensive appendix of the artifacts found
within the burials.
Through the years of this project, membership of
the research team changed, but the goal of the project
remained constant, that of ensuring that the story of
the origins, life, and death of the enslaved Africans
of colonial New York would not be absent from the
annals of world history.
O. Jackson Cole, Ph.D.

Howard University Executive-in-Charge of the
James A. Donaldson, Ph.D.

Dean, Howard University College of Arts
and Sciences
Editorial Method
For the sake of consistency and because this was primarily an archaeological project, all three technical
volumes of this series, The New York African Burial
Ground: Unearthing the African Presence in Colonial
New York, were edited according to the conventions of

the same style manuals: the style guide of the Society
for American Archaeology and The Chicago Manual
of Style, 15th edition.
Acknowledgments
The Howard University Archaeology Team is grateful

to the community members and the church, civic, and
cultural organizations that paid close attention to the
African Burial Ground Project over the years. Their
support made this work possible, and their questions
helped us to sharpen our inquiry.
We gratefully acknowledge Dr.O. Jackson Cole
(Office of the President) and Dr.James A. Donaldson
(Dean, College of Arts and Sciences) for their efforts
in the administration of the project. Also at Howard,
Ms.Reba Brewington, Office Manager for the Cobb
Laboratory, and Ms.Alma Kemp, Administrative
Assistant in the Office of the Dean, College of Arts and
Sciences, patiently fielded our questions, facilitated
the sharing of information, and routed paperwork and
files; Ms. Lori Sweet, Administrative Assistant, Office
of the President, helped ensure that the transmission
of the draft and final reports went smoothly.
We thank Contracting Officer Mildred Broughton
and others on the New York staff of the U.S. General
Services Administration for providing laboratory and
office facilities, initially at the World Trade Center
and later at 1Bowling Green, and for their efforts in
salvaging the laboratory after September11, 2001.
Nancy Brighton of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
on behalf of the Contracting Officers Technical Representative, acted as liaison between the research team,
GSA, and advisory agencies; oversaw the transfer
of the collections for reburial; and provided helpful
comments on the draft report. The staffs of the New
York City Landmarks Preservation Commission and
the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation provided consultation to the GSA and commented on
the draft report.
The archaeology team owes an enormous debt to
the African Burial Ground Projects Scientific Director, Dr.Michael L. Blakey. His knowledge, leadership,
generosity, encouragement, and resolve have been a

mainstay over the years. We are profoundly grateful to
all of the researchers from the Skeletal Biology Team
(led by Blakey and Dr.Lesley M. Rankin-Hill) and
the History Team (led by Dr.Edna Greene Medford),
who helped shape our findings while sharing theirs as
the project proceeded.
Dr.Blakey helped us to clarify and share the archaeological findings by organizing a series of multidisciplinary Sankofa Conferences, sponsored by Howard
University and the College of William and Mary,
that brought together the projects geographically
dispersed research teams and other scholars of Africa
and the African Diaspora. We wish to thank all of the
participants, particularly Selwyn H.H. Carrington,
Alan Goodman, Fatimah Jackson, Mark Mack, Edna
Greene Medford, and Lesley Rankin-Hill. Kofi Agorsah, Augustin Holl, Bob Paynter, and Chris DeCorse
helped formulate and refine archaeological issues.
Chris Moore, Grey Gundaker, and T.J. Davis, among
others, shared their insights on historical questions
raised by the archaeological findings.
We thank the Institute for Historical Biology at the
College of William and Mary for providing a second
institutional home for the project. We especially appreciate Shannon Mahoney and Autumn Barrett for their
research assistance, for answering our last-minute
questions about the skeletal data, and for their superb
efforts in facilitating the Sankofa Conferences.
Dr.Sherrill Wilson, Director of the New York
African Burial Ground Projects Office of Public
Education and Interpretation, shared her considerable knowledge of New Yorks African American
history, helped broaden the research by pointing out
important sources, opened her library to us, provided
the roster on escapee advertisements, read early
drafts of the report, and ensured that our findings
XXVI Acknowledgments
were brought to thousands of schoolchildren and
the wider public.
Meta Janowitz shared her knowledge of Dutch New
York and of the eighteenth-century stoneware that
was so ubiquitous at the African Burial Ground site,
discussed archaeological issues, read early drafts of
several chapters, and generally provided good cheer
in the New York laboratory.
The archaeological investigation was begun by the
late EdwardS. Rutsch of Historic Conservation and
Interpretation, and we thank him for first proving that
graves were still intact at the African Burial Ground
and for assembling the field team. Obviously, without
the field records, no analysis would have been possible. We thank Field Director Michael Parrington,
Brian Ludwig, and the entire field staff, along with
members of the Metropolitan Forensic Anthropology
Team, for their efforts in conducting and recording the
excavations under difficult conditions. Special thanks
go to Margo Schur and the other site artists who carefully drew each burial and to Dennis Seckler for the
photographs. Margo also assisted us by answering
questions about field recording procedures. Initial
laboratory processing of burial related artifacts was
under the direction of Linda Stone and subsequently
Gary McGowan of JMA. Charles Cheek was in charge
of the analysis of the nonburial component of the
290Broadway site, and we thank him for generously
sharing early drafts of his site report and answering
our questions as we proceeded with our analysis.
Numerous local libraries and archives yielded
resources for our analysis. We thank the staffs of the
following for helping us track down materials and
answering our questions: the New York Public Library
and the Schomburg Center for Research in Black
Culture, the New-York Historical Society, the New
York State Archives, the Brooklyn Public Library, the
New York Genealogical and Biographical Society,
the Municipal Archives of the City of New York, the
Trinity Church Archives, and the John Street Methodist Church.
Help with specific questions and analyses was
received from a number of individuals. Mac Headley
of Colonial Williamsburg shared his knowledge of
colonial cabinetry and coffin making and pointed us
to additional sources. Ed Howson answered questions
about joinery. Emily Wilson of Colonial Williamsburg
provided information on enameling. Douglas Ubelaker
provided information and sources on the rates of
decay of human remains. AnnF. Budd, Department of
Geology, University of Iowa, provided identifications
of coral specimens from the African Burial Ground.

John Boyd of the U.S. Customs Service Federal Crime
Laboratory performed spectrograph analysis on the
silver pendant. Michelle Gilbert guided us through the
literature on adornment in Ghana. Fatimah Jackson,
Kofi Agorsah, Muhammad Hatim, and Sylviane Diouf
provided information about Islamic burial practices.
Cheryl LaRoche answered questions about the conservation of artifacts from the burials. Jason Narvaez
and Jennifer Arnett provided technical advice on
report graphics.
Howard University provided technical staff for
digitizing the site map. We thank Robert Bethea for
overseeing the initial digitizing, and technicians Percival Taylor and Marques Roberts, who, along with
Ruth Mathis and Iciar Lucena Narvaez, patiently
refined, double-checked, and corrected the base mapping.
We thank Dean Susan Pease, Dean of the School
of Arts and Science, and Michael Park, Chair of the
Department of Anthropology, at Central Connecticut
State University for providing release time for Warren
Perry and for supporting his work on the project over
many years. Janet Woodruff, of Central Connecticut
State Universitys Archaeology Laboratory for African and African Diaspora Studies (ALAADS), has
provided energy and advice as well as many hours
of her own time. We thank RichardL. Porter of The
RBA Group for understanding the importance of the
project and making it possible for Jean Howson to
contribute much of her time. Thanks also to RBAs
Kathy Krumbine for help formatting front matter and
appendices, and Ed Zeltmann, who prepared all of the
site maps for the report.
This report has benefited greatly from the careful
critiques of the members of the Advisory Review
Board, Diana DiZerega Wall, Theresa Singleton, and
Frank McManamon. We are grateful for their excellent suggestions. The interpretations and any errors
or omissions, however, are our own.
Howard University gratefully acknowledges the
efforts of the African Burial Ground Project directors,
under the leadership of Dr.MichaelL. Blakey, and the
editors, authors, research team members, and research
consultants for their contributions to the Archaeology
Final Report. A tremendous debt of gratitude is owed
to the three members of the Advisory Review Board,
jointly appointed by the U.S. General Services Administration and Howard University, for the excellence
and professionalism of the critiques they provided for
the several iterations of this report.
Prologue
In 1992, I received a phone call from my friend and

colleague, Dr. Michael Blakey, who at the time was
on the faculty at Howard University. He was calling
to ask me to head up the archaeological component
of the African Burial Ground Project. I had mixed
emotions: I was flattered and excited but also found
the challenge frightening. Would I be able to handle
the responsibility for a site important to my discipline
of anthropology but also to the African-American
community of New York, my city, the city in which
I was reared?
I came to archaeology later in life than many of
my contemporaries, starting graduate work at City
University of New York in the late 1970s. Some of my
earliest experiences in the field were at sites associated
with nineteenth-century African American communities, including Brooklyns Weeksville (investigated
by Burt Salwen) and the oystering community at
Sandy Ground, Staten Island (investigated by Robert
Schuyler). These projects helped turn attention within
archaeology to the presence of African Americans
in New York. As my training continued, it became
clear to me that to obtain a greater understanding of
Africans in New York and in the Diaspora in general,
it would be advantageous to conduct archaeological
research in Africa.
While teaching as an adjunct in the Anthropology
Department at City College, I had the good fortune
of befriending Mpiwa Mbatha, a Zulu who taught
sociocultural anthropology. He sparked my interest in
the emergence of the Zulu kingdom in the nineteenth
century, and with help from him and others I was able
to spend 9 months in Swaziland conducting a regional
survey. My research was part of a general critique of
then-current theories of the rise of the Zulu kingdom,
and the settlement data contributed to a revised picture
of social upheaval. In the newer thinking, the Zulu
kingdom was part of a series of responses to havoc

in the interior of southern Africa caused by late
eighteenth-century European penetration spearheaded
by an illegal trade in captive Africans. My research
allowed me to integrate issues of settlement analysis,
the political economy of racism, and forms of domination and resistance, all being discussed by historical
archaeologists at that time.
Dr. Blakeys invitation would allow me to continue
investigating the hidden and marginalized histories of
the African Diaspora, participate in an increasingly
important sub-field within American archaeology,
bring the themes of domination and resistance to a
new set of data, and to work with my people. It was
also a time, the 1990s, when archaeologists in North
America increasingly worked closely with descendant
communities, in part because of the Native American
Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. I knew that
the African American community of New York City
had been instrumental in shaping the projects direction. And I knew, in ways that I suspected others did
not know, about the complexity of this community
and about the damage caused from having our history
hidden from us.
Growing up in the South Bronx, I was taught in
elementary school during the late 1940s and early
1950s that I was fortunate to live in New York
City and not in the south, because black folks were
enslaved in the south but were free in the north.
This fortune was belied when I looked around
the school and saw no teachers or administrators,
let alone principals, who were people of color. The
only people of color were black women working
in the lunchroom and one black man who was a
maintenance worker. Almost all of the students were
of African descent, and a few were Puerto Rican. I
never knew if we were supposed to be oblivious to
XVIII Prologue
this disjuncture, or to accept secondary status and be
thankful that we lived in the north.
Our received vision of Africa was no different. I
remember being shown a cartoon of loincloth-clad
African men with bones in their noses and negatively exaggerated lips and eyes, holding spears and
dancing around two white men with pith helmets in
a pot of boiling water. The message was clear: I was
fortunate to have been descended from Africans who
were brought to New York and saved by Lincoln,
rather than left in the jungles of Africa with those
cannibalistic savages, my ancestors. It was painful
to be black in New York City and subjected to an
educational system that taught us that Africans had no
history until Europeans rescued us from ourselves.
On the other hand, I had parents and grandparents who instilled black pride in my brother and me,
and demonstrated to us that we did have a history
beyond, and in spite of, captivity in the United States.
They taught us about our own family, in particular
my great-grandfather, Christopher J. Perry I, who in
1884 founded Philadelphias first black newspaper,
The Philadelphia Tribune. They introduced us to the
achievements of W. E. B. DuBois, Marcus Garvey,
Paul Robeson, Marion Anderson, Sojourner Truth,
and other black leaders who were not part of the New
York City school curriculum.
I received another lesson in African Diaspora history in 1963, when I heard Malcolm X speak about
the link between Africa and African-Americans at
a Black Muslim rally on 125th Street (or 25th Street,
as it was known to young, streetwise black youth).
During his speech, a listener taunted him: I aint left
nothing in Africa! Malcolm replied, You left your
mind in Africa. I understood Malcolms reply to mean
that Europeans had attempted, through coercion and
control, to remove African Diaspora peoples from
their African heritage, history, and identity. Since
that time, I have drawn strength from the memory
of Malcolms passion and commitment as I delved
into the relationship between Africa and the African
Diaspora. I resolved to learn the truth about African
people in Africa and the Diaspora and to challenge
the Eurocentric conceptions of who we were and what
our history had been.
In 1991, I was a doctoral candidate at the City
University of New Yorks Graduate Anthropology
Program, specializing in archaeology. At that time
there were only three postdoctoral-level archaeologists of color in the United States (Warren Barber,
Theresa Singleton, and Laura Henley Dean). Late one
night I was awakened by a knock at the door of my

South Bronx apartment. Errol Maitland, my friend
and former City College student, and an acquaintance
from the Patrice Lumumba Coalition, had come to
discuss the newly rediscovered African Burial Ground.
They urged me, as a black archaeologist, to become
involved in the project. I was deeply immersed in my
doctoral dissertation and despite my commitment to
the principles embodied in the project, I could not
dedicate the time and effort it would require. I recommended that they contact Dr. Blakey. When I received
Blakeys phone call in 1992, however, I committed
to joining the project as soon as I had completed my
Ph.D. In 1993, Howard University took control of the
project, and in 1994 I became the Associate Director
for Archaeology.
I knew that I could not accomplish such a daunting
and important task without capable, dedicated colleagues. Early in my association with the project, I
attended an interfaith service at the New York African
Egunfemi Adegbolola, Chief Alagba of New York,

commemorating the ancestors in a Yoruba ceremony at the
African Burial Ground (photograph by Dennis Seckler).
Burial Ground site. I stood on the sacred ground that

held my ancestors and asked them for help and guidance in retelling the lost histories of their lives. I soon
received a response as, one by one, the colleagues I
asked to join the team accepted what I see as a calling
from the ancestors.
I feel proud and privileged to have been asked to
be a part of a multidisciplinary research undertaking
aimed at telling the world the story of the ancestors. I am committed to the New York African Burial
Ground Project both as a member of the descendant
Prologue XIX
community and as a member of the academic community, and there are very few people in that zone of
overlap. I stood and still stand with my feet in each
world: this project, with all its stresses and rewards,
has allowed me to be whole.
The significance of the African Burial Ground
extends beyond its importance to the African American community. The history of this cemetery and of
those buried here speaks to the complex history of the
United States, with all its diverse populations, and to
an even larger, world history. Understanding is diminished when African people, women, and subaltern or
working class communities are marginalized; their
omission from our collective historical consciousness
has negative implications for all.
Warren R. Perry
New Britain, Connecticut
February 2006
Chapter 1
Introduction
Jean Howson, Leonard G. Bianchi, and Warren R. Perry
This volume is one of three disciplinary volumes on

the New York African Burial Ground Project. One
volume focuses on the skeletal biological analysis of
the remains recovered from the site (see Volume1
of this series, Skeletal Biology of the New York African Burial Ground [Blakey and Rankin-Hill 2009a]).
Another focuses on the documentary history, from a
diasporic perspective, of Africans who lived and died
in early New York (see Volume3 of this series, Historical Perspectives of the African Burial Ground: New
York Blacks and the Diaspora [Medford 2009]). The
present volume, consisting of three parts, presents the
archaeological research on the New York African Burial
Ground. General background on the New York African
Burial Ground project is presented in the beginning of
the skeletal biology component volume (Blakey and
Rankin-Hill 2009a). Here we provide background
information that is specifically relevant to the excavated site, the archaeological fieldwork undertaken in
19911992 (its planning, personnel, extent, duration,
termination, etc.), and the analysis and disposition of
nonskeletal material from the excavation.1
First, we review briefly the history of the project
(from a regulatory standpoint), list the questions posed
in the research design for archaeology, and explain the
organization of this report. The subsequent sections
provide a description of fieldwork, with a summary
of burials recovered, and a discussion of laboratory
procedures and methods. The impact of the September11, 2001, attack on World Trade Center (where
the archaeological laboratory was housed) and the
decision-making and logistical efforts that went into
the reburial of archaeological collections in October
2003 are described.
The site included historical archaeological components that were not
related to the cemetery. A separate report on the history, archaeological
excavation, and analysis of these components is in preparation by John
Milner Associates (JMA) for the GSA (Cheek 2003).
1
Project Background and

Organization of the Report
The Site, the Section 106 Process, and the
Memoranda of Agreement
The African Burial Ground is located in lower Manhattan, New York City and County. The portion of the
cemetery that has been investigated archaeologically
(the New York African Burial Ground) is located on
Block154, which is bounded on the north by Duane
Street, on the south by Reade Street, on the west by
Broadway, and on the east by Elk Street (Figure1).
It lay within the proposed construction site for the
290Broadway Federal Office Building, part of the
Foley Square Project of the General Services Administration (GSA). During the planning process for the
construction undertaking, GSA addressed a series
of environmental regulatory issues and retained the
services of an engineering firm, Edwards and Kelcey Engineers, to prepare an environmental impact
statement. Among the tasks performed under that
contract was archaeological research, pursuant to the
instructions and intents set forth by Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act and the National
Environmental Policy Act. The firm hired a cultural
resources subconsultant, Historic Conservation and
Interpretation (HCI) in 1989, and HCI prepared a
Stage1A documentary study in order to determine
the potential for archaeological resources within the
Foley Square project areas, including Block154 (Ingle
etal. 1990).2
A second component of the Foley Square Project was the new
Federal Courthouse, located on Block160 several blocks east of the
290Broadway site. The Courthouse archaeological investigation
resulted in excavation of the Five Points Site (Yamin 2000).
2
2 Jean Howson, Leonard G. Bianchi, and Warren R. Perry
Figure 1. Location of African Burial Ground archaeological excavation site in lower Manhattan, New York. Arrows point to Block 154.
New York City Mapped Streets, Section 12, 1997. (New York City Mapped Street: Section 12Borough of Manhattan, New York County
used with permission of the New York City Department of City Planning. All rights reserved.)
Chapter 1. Introduction 3
That background study, which was incorporated
into the Foley Square Project Draft Environmental
Impact Statement, indicated the possible presence of
remains associated with the New York African Burial
Ground within the projects footprint and recommended a limited program of archaeological testing.3
In brief, although much of the block was thought to
have been thoroughly disturbed by several phases of
building construction, three areas were thought to
have been left undisturbed or minimally disturbed:
the alignment of Republican Alley (an alley that had
been laid out in the late eighteenth century and never
built upon), former Lot12, and portions of former
Lots20/20/21 (Figure2). These three areas were
targeted for archaeological testing. Even though preservation potential was considered fairly low, it was
argued that any extant remains of the cemetery would
be highly significant and eligible for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).
A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was signed
by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
(ACHP) and GSA in March 1989. The MOA stipulated that archaeological investigations would be conducted at the project area in accordance with a research
design (to be prepared by GSA with consultation) that
would establish categories of historic significance;
that should archaeological materials be found, they
would be evaluated and treated in accordance with the
Secretary of the Interiors Standards and Guidelines
for Archaeological Documentation (48 FR 44734-37)
and the Section 110 Guidelines, in conformance with
the research design and for purposes of Section 106
compliance; that such features and materials would be
considered eligible for listing in the NRHP; and that
GSA, with consultation, would determine appropriate
levels of mitigation.
Although the MOA was in place, archaeological
fieldwork failed to proceed within the usual phased
framework, in which testing designed to determine
the extent and integrity of resources would have been
followed by evaluation and consultation on mitigation or avoidance. The full horizontal and vertical
extent of the intact graves was never determined in a
testing phase. Rather, when archaeological testing
conducted by GSAs consultant HCI beginning in
Other potential resources identified in the 1A report included
remains associated with eighteenth-century potteries and with
residential development dating to the end of the eighteenth and
early nineteenth centuries. Subsequent archaeological research on
the nonburial components of the 290 Broadway site is detailed in a
separate report (Cheek 2003).
3
May 1991 revealed the presence of intact burials at

the rear of Lot12, GSA adopted full archaeological
excavation as the mitigation strategy. At first, it was
assumed that only a small area would contain intact
graves, but ultimately graves were found to extend
from the former north-south leg of Republican Alley
to the eastern extent of the project site. The initial
documentary research, as well as analysis of subsequent test borings, had failed to adequately determine
the full depth of fillas much as 25feet in the eastern
area at Elk Streetcovering the original site. This fill
had protected hundreds of graves, and the discovery
of this level of preservation came as a surprise.
Mitigation through full data recovery continued
to be pursued until July 1992, when, in the face of
mounting public pressure, the field excavations were
shut down by GSA. In the meantime, an amendment to
the MOA was signed in December 1991 by the ACHP,
the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC), and GSA. This amendment stipulated,
in part, that a research design would be prepared by
GSAs consultant, HCI; that burial excavations would
continue once field safety issues were addressed; that
GSA, in consultation with the ACHP, LPC, and interested parties, would determine the appropriate level of
analysis of the human remains; that GSA, in consultation with interested parties and the City of New York,
would ensure the respectful and dignified treatment
of all human remains recovered; that human remains
would be reburied; and that GSA would commemorate
the cemetery with a memorial, develop exhibit space
in 290Broadway, and produce a video documentary
on the project. The GSA remained, and still remains,
the agency responsible for compliance with Section
106 and implementation of the MOA as amended.
Ultimately, the field excavations were halted prior
to the preparation of an acceptable research design
partly because of the lack of such a documentat
the end of July 1992. For background on the political struggles surrounding the burial excavations, see
Chapter1 of Skeletal Biology of the New York African
Burial Ground (Blakey 2009). On July1, 1992, HCI
was replaced as GSAs archaeological consultant by
JMA, and biocultural anthropologist Dr. Michael
Blakey, then of Howard University and currently of
the College of William and Mary, had consulted at
the site and participated in GSAs public meetings.
Some portions of the project site had had all burials
removed. In other portions, graves were either known
still to be in place or were presumed to be in place (see
Chapter3 for a discussion of site conditions before,
Volume 2, Part 1. The Archaeology of the New York African Burial Ground
Figure 2. Plan of archaeological excavation area showing former property lines and alley in relation to streets.
during, and after the project). The footprint of the
34-story office tower had been completely excavated,
but the Pavilion area, the proposed site of a smaller
structure, had not. Thus, owing to the timing of the
cessation of excavation, construction of the main
tower building could proceed.
Research Design
In late 1992, Blakey was appointed scientific director of the New York African Burial Ground Project,
and in 1993, Howard University received a contract
to conduct the postexcavation research. A research
design prepared by Howard University and JMA was
accepted by GSA, after comments had been received
from consulting agencies (the LPC and the ACHP), in
spring of that year. This document covered both the
New York African Burial Ground and the non-burialground components of the 290Broadway project site.
It stated that the New York African Burial Ground
meets two of the evaluation criteria for listing in
the NRHP: Criteriona (association with the broad
patterns of our history) and Criteriond (having the
potential to yield important information about the
past)and indeed, the site was designated a National
Historic Landmark (NHL) in April 1993 (Howson
and Harris [1992], reproduced in AppendixA, Part3
of this volume). A finding of No Adverse Effect
was not possible even with full archaeological data
recovery, as both Criteraa and d were cited. Partial
mitigation of the adverse effects of the construction
of 290Broadway was to include programs of data
analysis, curation, and education.
The research design listed numerous research questions to be addressed in the data recovery program. It
specified the following for the nonskeletal archaeological analysis (Howard University and JMA 1993:
4147):4
What spatial variation can be seen in burial types
in the New York African Burial Ground and what
cultural explanations can be offered for this variation?
What taphonomic forces have acted upon the cemetery and how have they affected the skeletal database?
Beyond posing these questions, the bulk of the research design
for archaeology described field methods (after the fact) and outlined
methods for specific materials analysis. It should be noted that none
of the authors of the current report participated in the preparation of
the Research Design.
4
What can be learned about the distribution of different types of coffins, coffin size differences,
coffin decoration, and coffin manufacturing techniques?
What cultural and temporal information can be
obtained from the study and analysis of artifacts
found in grave pits and in coffin fills?
These questions and many others are addressed
in subsequent chapters of this report. In addition to
goals of the research design, however, the project
team has had a complementary agenda that emerged
from the process of public engagement. Four topics of
overarching concern to the community were identified
during this process: (1)the cultural background and
origins of the burial population, (2)the cultural and
biological transformations from African to African
American identities, (3)the quality of life brought
about by enslavement in the Americas, and (4)the
modes of resistance to enslavement. Our archaeological analyses ultimately are designed to provide information relevant to these issues. They are addressed
as appropriate throughout this report as described in
the following section.
Report Organization
Our approach begins with due attention to and respect
for the individual graves that archaeologists excavated
during 1991 and 1992. There were no mass graves
at the New York African Burial Ground, and few
were shared by more than one person. The making
of the African Burial Ground involved funeral after
funeral, carried out for individuals by their survivors
one by one, week after week, year in and year out. In
keeping with the Howard University teams respect
for the gravity of excavating such a cemetery archaeologically, the disinterment of each individual grave
at the cemetery is described in Part2 of this volume.
By providing basic information on how each burial
was found, what the grave contained, the condition
of the remains, the age and sex of the individual, and
whether and how it overlapped with other graves, a
partial and admittedly inadequate reconstruction of
the original interment is made possible.
Part1 of this volume is organized as follows.
The remainder of Chapter1 describes the fieldwork
(including a list of burials excavated) and laboratory
methods; the impact of the destruction of the World
Trade Center on September11, 2001; and the reburial
of archaeological materials. Chapter2 provides histor-

ical background and context. It consists of two parts:
first, a document-based chronological history of the
burial ground (including its origin, the development of
its surrounds, and its closing), and second, a comparison of documentary evidence about African funeral
practices in New York and in the African diaspora. In
Chapter3, we describe the archaeological site as such,
including the original landform, postcemetery development of the parcel, the condition of the graves, and
the limits of excavation. Next, Chapter4 presents our
methodology for arriving at four temporal groupings
of the gravesnamely, Early, Middle, Late-Middle,
and Late Groupsthat were excavated at the site.
Before turning to each temporal group, Chapter5
presents an overview of the mortuary population,
burial practices, and spatial arrangement of the New
York African Burial Ground, as observed through
the archaeological investigation. Attention is paid to
the use of coffins, grave orientation, body position,
co-interment, shrouding and clothing the dead, and
the presence of personal adornment and other items
in association with the dead. Chapters69 discuss the
burials by temporal group, providing overviews of the
town of New York, population figures, and discussions
of the material culture and spatial arrangement of
burials. Selected unique and unusual graves from each
group are described. Chapters1014 describe specific
categories of mortuary material culture: coffins, pins
and shrouding, clothing, adornment, and other burial
items. Throughout the chapters, we address interpretive themes of social identity, enslavement and
resistance to bondage, mortuary practice and spiritual
and cultural agency, and the role of the African Burial
Ground in creating and sustaining a community. Chapter15 provides a conclusion. All appendixes(AJ) are
provided in Part3 of this volume.
ing area was halted until GSA decided to proceed

with hand excavation of burials and arrangements for
appropriate site preparationincluding the shoring of
the excavation perimeter and construction of an access
rampcould be made. Subsequently, fieldwork proceeded with a combination of machine-aided clearing
and hand excavation, and shelters were constructed to
protect the exposed graves and the excavators. These
temporary structures were heated and lit once fieldwork progressed into the winter months (Figures36).
As each successive shelter was constructed (each was
progressively more substantial), it was designated with
a letter from StructureA to StructureG (hence
many of the field records, including artifact-bag labels,
included a structure letter).
HCI conducted the field excavations through the
end of June 1992, when JMA assumed the project as
GSAs new archaeology consultant. Most of the burial
ground field staff was retained, including Site Director
Michael Parrington. Excavation personnel are listed
in the acknowledgments.
No member of the Howard University Archaeology
Team participated in the fieldwork at the site, although
members of the skeletal biology staff did so for brief
periods. The lack of continuity of personnel between
the fieldwork and analytical phases of research is common in public archaeology and can result in loss of
information. Every effort has been made to minimize
such loss in the current project. Procedures followed
for the excavation of burials have been reconstructed
from records kept by HCI and JMA, with the aid of the
description contained in the 1993 research design. In
addition, we consulted with various members of the
field staff regarding methods, both during the period
when our staffs overlapped at the laboratory and later
during the preparation of this report.
Archaeological Fieldwork
Procedures
Archaeological testing commenced in May 1991 in

Lot12 (see Figure 2). A backhoe was used to excavate test trenches within the front portion of the lot
and within the former footprint of Republican Alley,
where African Burial Ground graves were considered
most likely to have survived. Human remains, which
subsequently were determined likely to be from the
eastern half of Burial1 and from other disturbed burials in the area, were discovered during excavation of
TrenchD within Republican Alley in June. At that
time, machine excavation of the immediate surroundThe New York African Burial Ground
Survey and Mapping

A site grid was established aligned with the street grid
and property lines. The north-south base line (grid
coordinate 0feet East) was the west edge of Lot12,
along the interior (east) side of an extant concrete wall.
The east-west base line (0feet South) was located
where the north-south line intersected the front edge of
Lot12, along Duane Street. Drawings and maps were
plotted with reference to east and south coordinates
on this grid, and all horizontal measurements were
taken in feet and tenths of feet.
Figure 3. Backhoe clearing adjacent to temporary archaeological

excavation shelter early in the fieldwork (photograph by Dennis
Seckler).
Figure 4. Excavation shelter erected to allow night and winter work

(photograph by Dennis Seckler).
Figure 5. Archaeologists working under lights. Teams of two worked

on each burial excavation, and the density of the graves made for
close quarters inside the shelters (photograph by Dennis Seckler).
Figure 6. Construction of the 290 Broadway Federal building during

archaeological fieldwork; the archaeological excavation shelter is
visible at the rear. The view is toward the southeast (photograph by
Dennis Seckler).

A site datum designated A was established with
an elevation measured at 27.50feet above mean sea
level (AMSL; measurements per Sandy Hook, where
sea level is measured for the New York City area).
A series of subdatum points was used throughout
the excavations. Grid coordinates were recorded for
some, and for each, the depth below the site datum was
recorded (see AppendixB, Part3 of this volume). All
depths recorded in the field for burial features were
taken from these subdatum points and therefore can
be converted readily to absolute elevations relative
to sea level. Vertical measurements in the field were
taken in feet, tenths of feet, and hundredths of feet.
Depths recorded on the field drawings and forms
simply needed to be subtracted from the elevations of
the datum points listed for each burial. All elevations
referred to in this report are absolute elevations, not
excavation depths.
Clearing
Clearing of the massive amounts of fill and building
material overlying the graves was accomplished by
machine (excavators and backhoes). In some areas,
this task resulted in damage to graves, discussed in
Chapter3. Once overburden was removed to a level
believed to be just above burials, or once burial outlines or tops of coffins were exposed, hand clearing
commenced. In some areas, historical features postdating the burial ground were encountered before the
graves and were excavated first or in conjunction with
adjacent burials (see the report on the 290Broadway
nonburial site component in Cheek [2003]). The need
to construct excavation shelters and shoring facilities,
safety issues, and, of course, the construction activity
for 290Broadway carried out simultaneously with the
archaeological fieldwork complicated the excavation
strategy. Building-construction access ramps, perimeter walls, and underpinning for adjacent 22Reade
Street caused delays and damage during the clearing
of burial ground areas. As each shelter was built, or,
in some cases, as it was dismantled, graves located
beneath its sills had to be identified and excavated.
In general, the site was cleared for archaeological excavation from west to east, beginning with the
rear of Lot12 and the north-south leg of Republican
Alley. As the months of fieldwork progressed, GSA
identified a Critical Area for priority excavation,
that being the footprint of the tower building. This
area was cleared more speedily by machine than the
westernmost area had been to provide quicker access
for the archaeological team. There is no question that
site clearing was accomplished under less than optimal

standards from the point of view of archaeological
investigation. The pressure to move forward with
building construction forced compromises with the
scientific program, such that historical features above
the level of the graves were often stripped, and the
opportunity to examine the site carefully for remnants
of the original ground surface was lost. It is probably
no accident that the only portion of the site for which
an extant eighteenth-century-cemetery surface was
identified was the first area excavated, the north-south
leg of Republican Alley. Here, the upper few feet of
fill were mechanically removed, but lower layers of
fill were excavated by hand with shovels.
In parts of the site (Lot12, the westernmost section
of Republican Alley, and Lots20 and 22), numbered
excavation units (5- or 10-foot squares) were opened.
When excavation of these units revealed burial outlines, the burial excavation proceeded separately from
the rest of the unit. Nonburial excavation units are
described in a separate report (Cheek 2003).
Burial Identification and Numbering

When a presumed burial was discovered or soon after,
it was given a number. Burial numbering was consecutive. All records and objects related to the burial were
assigned this number, including recordation forms,
artifact boxes and bags, and wrapped skeletal remains.
A total of 435burial numbers were assigned during the
fieldwork at the New York African Burial Ground, but
there were not this many actual interments. Some of the
contexts referred to by these numbers subsequently were
determined not to be burials, or were determined to be
parts of other burials. In addition, some of the burials
excavated contained no surviving human remains. This
was a result of either complete decay or, as appears to be
the case for at least two graves, an instance in which the
coffin was placed in the ground empty or remains were
removed in the past. Table1 summarizes the cases with
no human remains. The total number of graves identified
was 424, and the total number of individuals for whom
any skeletal remains could be inventoried numbered
419. All burials that could be identified as such, whether
or not human remains had survived, were included
in the archaeological analysis to the extent possible
(e.g.,they were considered in the stratigraphic, spatial,
and chronological analyses and in the distributions of
artifacts, where such survived). In a few interments
Burials199, 301, 329, 391, and 420skeletal analysis
revealed the presence of remains from more than one
individual within a burial context.
Table 1. Assigned Burial Numbers with No Discrete Human Remains Associated

Burial No.
Explanation for Lack of Human Remains
62
Remains were determined to be from Burial 76.
74
There were no extant remains (empty child coffin?).
92
129
There were no extant remains (burial with empty coffin; adult size, hexagonal).
139
Soil stain was determined not to be a burial.
140
141
145
There were no extant remains (burial with empty coffin; adult size, hexagonal).
206
There were no extant remains (infant coffin).
220
231
232
233
261
There were no extant remains (adult coffin, disturbed).
269
296
There were no extant remains (infant coffin). (A tooth bud was later found in the laboratory.)
359
There were no extant remains (partial coffin).
360
There were no extant remains.
378
Burial left in place in 1992.
381
401
Coffin remains only; determined to be from burial 352.
407
Determined not to be a burial.
409
Determined not to be a burial.
411
421
422
Possible coffin remains only; no human bone.
423
Grave with coffin was identified but no human remains exposed in situ, left in place in 1992.
426
Grave with coffin was identified but no human remains exposed, left in place in 1992.
429
430
433
434
435

Basic burial data are contained in AppendixC,
Part3 of this volume. A list of the excavated burials
is provided in Table2, which should be used along
with Figure7 (the site plan); a full description of the
disinterment of each burial will be found in Part2 of
this volume.5
In addition to the burial number, a catalog number
was assigned during field excavation. The catalog
number is also a consecutive number that in theory
provides a way to differentiate specific field contexts,
such as stratigraphic levels, from one another. However, at the New York African Burial Ground, only
one catalog number was used for each burial, so that
the material from the grave-shaft fill, coffin remains,
material from within the coffin, skeletal remains, and
all recovered samples had the same number. The only
possible record, then, of where within a burial context
any given item or sample came from might be the
label on the bag or box used in the field to collect the
material or on field drawings that depicted specific
items that were then bagged or boxed separately with
specific labeling. Typically, the information retained
on containers was sufficient to determine which materials were from the grave shaft, which from within the
coffin, etc., but there was no way to efficiently track
these proveniences in a database when first brought
to the lab, nor were all containers sufficiently labeled
for us to determine exactly where items or samples
were collected. For instance, because all nail bags had
the same number for any given burial, we could not
distinguish coffin nails from any extra nails found
in the grave or shaft. Likewise, if shell was found in
the grave shaft and also on or in a coffin, we could
not readily determine which shells were from which
location. Because grave shafts were excavated as
single units with just one catalog number, there was
no way to determine whether diagnostic artifacts were
recovered from the upper part of the shaft, alongside
the coffin, or beneath the coffin.
Excavation of Burials
Where visible, grave shafts were delineated on the
ground and then excavated in full in a single layer until
a coffin lid or bones were encountered. The graveThe site maps used in this report include the nineteenthtwentiethcentury lot lines and numbers for Block 154. The individual lots were
identified in the Stage 1 research in order to trace development of the
block over time; the lots were subsumed within a larger tax parcel at
the time the project commenced. The former lot boundaries are useful,
however, for understanding the excavation strategy and differential
preservation and for locating archaeological site areas.
5
shaft-fill soils were screened through 1/4-inch-wire

mesh, and notes indicate that sometimes the soil was
water-screened (there is no general record of which
burials were wet-screened or how they were selected).
Typically, a team of two excavators worked on each
burial through to completion, although in some cases,
teams were switched in the course of a burial or extra
excavators were recruited. When a coffin lid or evidence of a coffin outline was encountered, elevations
were taken, and sometimes the burial was drawn
and/or photographed at this stage (see description of
recording). Where feasible, wood samples were taken
(although, in many cases, the only recoverable wood
samples consisted of wood-stained soil). Excavators
endeavored to leave coffin sides and all coffin nails
in place during the excavation of the skeletal remains.
Additional wood samples were taken from the sides
and finally the bottoms of coffins where feasible.
Usually, skeletal remains were visible at the same
level as coffin lid remains. One excavator began working to expose the cranium while the second began trying to locate the femurs. Once the general disposition
of the remains was established, the standard order
of excavation was legs and arms, chest, hands and
feet, and finally the facial and pelvic areas. Soil from
among the bones was screened for artifacts, although
typically, artifacts were identified during excavation of
the bones and left in place until they could be recorded
in situ along with the skeleton.
Field assessments were conducted by the Metropolitan Forensic Anthropology Team (MFAT), a
team of physical anthropologists based at Lehman
College hired by GSAs consulting archaeologists.
Assessments included condition of remains as well as
preliminary evaluations of age, sex, and pathologies.
Once each burial was fully exposed, one of the MFAT
specialists performed an assessment of the physical
remains. In some cases, the MFAT members assisted
with excavations as well. MFAT personnel are listed
in the acknowledgments.
All bones were left in place for recordation, then
were removed individually and wrapped (initially
using newspaper, but in July 1992, acid-free paper
was adopted by the JMA field team) and packed in
boxes. Once the skeletal remains were removed, the
remaining grave-shaft fill was excavated and screened.
All human remains were transferred directly from the
site to Lehman College laboratories in the Bronx for
storage. Artifacts found with burials in direct association with skeletal remains (i.e., with the exception
of coffin remains and grave-shaft-fill contents) were
Table 2. Excavated Burials with Age, Sex, and Location
Low
Age
High
Age
adult
20
25
female?
82.5
2
3
adult
27
42
male
43.5
11
adult
25
35
male
adult
30
40
male
86.5
11
4A
adult
20
25
male?
86.5
11
subadult
undetermined
86.5
8.17
adult
25
30
male?
87.5
15
6.98
subadult
undetermined
80.5
15
7.29
infant
0.5
undetermined
82.5
6.58
adult
35
45
male
89.5
25
5.44
10
adult
40
45
male
82.5
20
6.04
11
adult
30
40
male?
83.5
12
6.73
12
13d
adult
35
45
female
89.5
12
6.13
103.5
-5
6.37
14
infant
undetermined
89.5
12
6.10
15
subadult
11
18
undetermined
103.5
-5
7.27
16
adult
50
60
female
6.03
17
subadult
undetermined
83.25
20
4.94
18
adult
35
45
female?
81.5
12
4.53
19
subadult
undetermined
81.5
20
6.36
20
adult
8.68
Burial
No.
Age
a
Category
0.5
45
21
subadult
22
subadult
23
adult
25
24
subadult
25
0.5
50
Sex
male
Grid South
107
107
85
Grid East
Elevation
9.13
undetermined
87.5
20
6.42
undetermined
96.5
-1.5
6.97
35
male
87.5
5.48
undetermined
87.5
7.88
adult
20
24
female
87.5
20
6.07
26
subadult
12
20
3.74
27
subadult
1.4
6.73
28
subadult
-2
8.58
29
adult
35
45
male?
3.92
30
subadult
11
undetermined
86
10
5.48
31
adult
14
16
undetermined
103.5
-1
6.47
32
adult
50
60
male
86.5
23.5
5.74
33
adult
undetermined
87.5
10
5.48
34
35
adult
undetermined
87.5
15
6.02
subadult
undetermined
87.5
15
6.08
36
adult
female
87.5
-5
8.17
37
38
adult
45
55
65
20
7.44
adult
12
18
female
39
subadult
undetermined
2.5
4.5
2.8
10
undetermined
83
undetermined
88.5
undetermined
83
male
97.5
86
10
5.18
81.75
40
4.69

Table 2. Excavated Burials with Age, Sex, and Location (continued)
Burial
No.
Age
a
Category
40
adult
41
adult
42
infant
43
Low
Age
High
Age
50
60
Sex
female
Grid South
65
Grid East
Elevation
10
7.88
undetermined
99.5
-11
7.57
91.5
45
4.92
-7
6.42
undetermined
subadult
2.5
4.5
undetermined
44
subadult
undetermined
85.5
21.5
5.54
45
subadult
2.5
4.5
undetermined
103.5
-5
6.77
46
adult
female?
95.5
5.27
47
adult
male
103.5
6.42
undetermined
87.5
20
4.89
female
87.5
40
3.76
undetermined
87.5
30
5.81
75
10
8.58
undetermined
87.5
25
4.69
undetermined
87.5
7.85
undetermined
92
-4
7.63
35
45
40
50
105
48
adult
49
50
adult
subadult
51
adult
52
undetermined
53
subadult
54
adult
55
56
subadult
undetermined
92.20
7.65
adult
30
34
female
87.5
17
5.64
24
0.25
32
0.75
female
57
subadult
0.88
2.16
undetermined
87.5
25
5.27
58
subadult
3.5
4.5
undetermined
65
15
7.42
59
infant
0.25
undetermined
65
15
6.58
60
subadult
0.25
0.75
undetermined
95
-1
7.73
61
undetermined
undetermined
87.5
45
5.53
63
adult
70
15
7.12
64
subadult
65
35
45
male
0.38
0.88
undetermined
92.5
45
5.25
infant
0.49
undetermined
75
10
8.58
66
infant
0.16
undetermined
93.5
25
5.23
67
adult
40
50
male
94
7.28
68
adult
21
25
male
91
3.5
5.93
69
adult
30
60
male
89
-3.5
6.53
70
adult
35
45
male
92.5
10
5.98
71
adult
25
35
female
75
10
7.86
72
subadult
undetermined
87.5
34
6.29
73
adult
20
30
female?
79
10
7.28
80
15
5.73
92.5
34
5.99
74
infant
76
adult
25
55
77
subadult
78
adult
79
subadult
80
subadult
75
0.67
16
0.25
1.3
19
0.75
undetermined
75
10
8.33
undetermined
male
88.5
35
5.26
undetermined
91
10
4.31
undetermined
82
7.88
undetermined
87.5
40
3.61
Burial
No.
Age
a
Category
81
adult
82
adult
83
subadult
84
85
adult
subadult
0.25
86
subadult
87
subadult
88
undetermined
89
adult
50
90
91
adult
35
subadult
Low
Age
18
High
Age
25
Sex
Grid South
Grid East
Elevation
female
93
-3
6.93
female
93
6.03
undetermined
87.5
31
5.53
female
87.5
35
4.45
0.75
undetermined
80.5
15
6.79
undetermined
74
18
7.89
undetermined
94
6.88
undetermined
93.5
-4
6.36
60
female
90.5
48
4.8
40
female
81.5
6.81
17
0.67
21
1.3
undetermined
95
48
4.95
93
94
adult
undetermined
85
-3
6.98
subadult
undetermined
92.5
47
4.75
95
subadult
12
undetermined
94.5
51
4.85
96
adult
16
18
male
94.5
47
5.33
97
adult
40
50
male
81
20
6.73
98
subadult
undetermined
81
20
6.23
99
100
subadult
10
undetermined
91.5
70
4.92
undetermined
80.5
20
5.44
101
adult
male
88.5
49
4.32
102
subadult
undetermined
79.5
20
5.93
103
104
subadult
undetermined
79.5
20
5.83
adult
30
40
female
89.5
61
3.89
105
adult
35
45
male
95
60
4.37
106
adult
25
35
female?
90.5
71
3.85
107
adult
35
40
female
90
48
3.94
subadult
26
1.33
35
2.67
108
subadult
0.25
0.75
undetermined
87
53
5.4
109
subadult
0.67
1.33
undetermined
90.5
54
4.32
110
infant
-0.17
0.17
undetermined
90
78
5.33
111
112
subadult
0.67
1.33
undetermined
91.5
53
4.87
subadult
0.25
0.75
undetermined
89
82.5
4.52
113
adult
undetermined
91.5
60
3.62
114
adult
45
50
male
94.5
91
3.79
115
116
adult
25
35
female
89.5
89
3.81
adult
45
55
male
95.5
81.5
3.64
117
118
infant
undetermined
91.5
77
4.14
undetermined
94.5
55
4.18
119
120
adult
35
45
male
88.5
72
3.79
adult
25
34
female
88.5
70
3.54
121
subadult
86
70
4.19
adult
2.5
4.5
undetermined

Burial
No.
Age
a
Category
122
adult
123
subadult
124
Low
Age
18
High
Age
Grid South
Grid East
Elevation
female
93
61
3.53
undetermined
89.5
80
4.04
adult
undetermined
91.5
95
5.09
125
adult
female?
64.5
52
3.96
126
subadult
3.5
5.5
undetermined
88
80.5
3.4
127
subadult
0.67
1.33
undetermined
90
95
3.71
128
infant
0.17
undetermined
0.67
20
Sex
1.33
92.5
83
3.45
91.5
95
4.54
undetermined
92
56
3.27
undetermined
91.5
76.5
3.83
male
64.5
61.5
4.01
96
78
4.06
62.5
85
2.23
129f
130
subadult
131
subadult
132
adult
133
subadult
25
1
30
2
undetermined
134
adult
40
50
female
135
adult
30
40
male
70
70
2.81
136
subadult
undetermined
95
86.7
4.09
137
adult
25
138
subadult
35
undetermined
63
75
3.86
67.5
86
4.13
25
5
30
undetermined
142
adult
female
88
90
4.05
143
subadult
10
undetermined
88
80.5
3.11
144
infant
undetermined
88
90
3.8
73.5
74
4.93
0.17
145
146
infant
undetermined
73.5
74.5
4.72
147
adult
55
65
male
70.5
56.5
3.88
148
adult
12
18
undetermined
91.5
70
3.27
149
subadult
88
90
3.85
adult
20
1
28
undetermined
150
female
70.5
80
4.43
151
adult
35
45
male
67.5
83
3.84
152
undetermined
undetermined
55.5
67
1.90
153
adult
female?
54.5
74
1.48
154
adult
female
95.5
75
3.43
155
adult
92
75
3.14
156
adult
115
2.35
157
adult
158
0.5
25
29
undetermined
30
60
female
adult
20
30
male
159
adult
25
35
female
160
subadult
161
subadult
162
adult
35
45
163
adult
18
164
subadult
female?
3.5
66.5
53.5
81.5
1.87
63
92
2.17
73.5
90
3.43
undetermined
73
98.5
3.10
undetermined
74.5
90
male
55
51.5
2.31
24
male?
74.5
99
2.18
13
undetermined
52.5
91
1.47
5.5
Burial
No.
Age
a
Category
165
adult
166
subadult
0.5
167
subadult
8.5
168
adult
169
subadult
5.5
170
subadult
11
171
adult
44
60
male
172
adult
25
35
female
173
subadult
174
adult
17
18
male
175
adult
24
28
176
adult
20
177
adult
30
178
adult
179
adult
25
180
subadult
181
adult
182
subadult
7.5
183
subadult
0.63
184
subadult
185
adult
21
186
infant
187
subadult
1.5
188
adult
Low
Age
High
Age
Sex
Grid South
Grid East
Elevation
undetermined
62.5
73
undetermined
55.5
92.5
2.10
12.5
undetermined
86.5
65
2.56
male
95.5
68.5
4.87
undetermined
91.5
81
2.67
undetermined
96
65
4.33
53.5
99.5
1.05
40.5
88
1.61
101
0.55
60.5
90
2.31
male
72
64.5
4.44
24
male
74.5
65.5
3.10
60
undetermined
91.5
80
2.23
male
62
57
30
male
46.5
98
11
13
undetermined
50
20
23
male
66
115
2.23
undetermined
94
69
3.81
1.13
undetermined
50
113.5
0.33
1.5
undetermined
52
108.5
0.44
male
54.5
122
0.85
0.17
undetermined
47.5
110
0.09
undetermined
52.5
119.5
0.94
32
undetermined
58.5
52.5
3.85
0.25
26
9.5
0.75
12.5
23
undetermined
189
adult
190
subadult
191
adult
25
30
male
192
adult
40
60
female
193
adult
30
48
194
adult
30
195
adult
196
0.38
0.88
57
undetermined
95.5
undetermined
55
56.5
97.5
3.42
0.57
87.5
1.83
male
65.5
101.5
40
male
50.5
84
30
40
female
81.5
63
adult
20
24
undetermined
83
56
197
adult
45
55
female
198
subadult
199
adult
200
adult
201
subadult
202
adult
12
203
adult
12
204
adult
1.5
0.12
65.5
101.5
30
-0.30
100.5
67
0.95
4.14
76
57.5
4.05
undetermined
86.5
80
3.61
female
73.5
80
3.39
male
75.5
77
3.57
undetermined
59.5
70.5
3.25
18
female?
85.5
70
3.4
18
undetermined
59
77
4.04
77.5
98
3.81
40
3.5
female?

Burial
No.
Age
a
Category
205
adult
Low
Age
High
Age
18
20
Sex
female
206
25
Grid South
Grid East
Elevation
59.5
102
0.41
75.5
93
3.31
78.5
95
3.76
207
adult
35
female?
208
subadult
undetermined
77
96
3.70
209
adult
40
50
male
42
94
0.43
210
adult
35
45
male
46
116
0.22
211
adult
male?
77
79.5
3.93
212
subadult
82.5
55
3.85
213
adult
45
55
female
84.5
85.5
3.93
214
adult
45
55
male
79.5
63.5
4.84
215
infant
0.16
undetermined
81.5
72.5
4.57
216
infant
0.16
undetermined
78.5
57
4.47
217
adult
17
male
64.5
122.5
1.34
218
subadult
0.5
3.5
undetermined
89
73
3.48
219
subadult
undetermined
71.5
122
2.20
78
92
3.75
83.5
77
3.55
118
0.5
4.5
5.5
19
undetermined
220
221
adult
30
60
male
male?
76.5
25
35
female
66.5
76.5
2.69
2.39
222
adult
223
adult
224
subadult
0.5
1.33
undetermined
77.5
97
225
subadult
0.5
1.25
undetermined
64.5
95.5
226
infant
0.17
undetermined
83
77
3.69
227
undetermined
undetermined
77
84
4.22
228
adult
male?
86
55
4.20
229
subadult
undetermined
83.5
72
4.22
230
adult
female
6.75
55
11.25
65
0.24
45.5
106
0.73
231
77.5
97
2.90
232e
77.5
97
2.41
127
1.84
233
73
234
infant
undetermined
77.5
235
adult
28
42
female
71.5
236
subadult
undetermined
84.5
53.5
3.86
237
undetermined
undetermined
80
55.5
4.11
238
adult
male
78.5
62
3.43
239
subadult
3.5
undetermined
83.5
70
3.8
240
subadult
241
adult
55
65
2.66
undetermined
79.5
female
54.5
121
-0.18
242
adult
40
50
female
49.5
117
-0.30
243
244
adult
40
50
male
57.5
121
0.10
subadult
undetermined
51.5
90
0.88
40
1.5
0.88
0.5
50
96.5
123
95.5
2.24
1.44
2.73
Burial
No.
Age
a
Category
Low
Age
High
Age
Sex
245
subadult
2.5
4.5
undetermined
75
85.5
3.55
246
subadult
0.5
2.9
undetermined
82.5
70
3.77
247
adult
35
49.9
male?
84.5
90
3.69
248
subadult
14
15
undetermined
71.2
118.5
1.14
249
subadult
undetermined
81
87
4.16
250
adult
undetermined
80.5
84
4.07
251
subadult
12
14
undetermined
79.5
79
3.73
252
subadult
undetermined
64.5
95.5
253
subadult
13
15
undetermined
82.5
65.5
4.02
254
subadult
255
0.67
1.33
Grid South
Grid East
Elevation
3.5
5.5
undetermined
79.5
97.5
2.08
infant
0.17
undetermined
79.3
117.9
1.81
256
adult
40
60
male
77.5
79
2.82
257
adult
30
40
male
72.1
64.5
3.21
258
infant
undetermined
85.5
78
3.21
259
adult
17
female?
40.5
102
0.47
260
undetermined
0.5
19
undetermined
84.5
53.5
3.89
87.5
80
3.5
male?
38.5
120
-0.31
261e
262
adult
15
263
subadult
undetermined
88.5
74
3.20
264
adult
undetermined
80
55
4.15
265
subadult
undetermined
82
120
1.74
266
adult
35
female
38.5
113.5
-0.59
267
adult
undetermined
82.5
94
4.09
268
infant
undetermined
74.5
125.5
0.4
male
84.5
123.5
1.44
male
76.5
65
3.70
undetermined
88.5
74.5
2.8
undetermined
81.5
52.5
4.27
79.5
70
3.55
female?
81
50
3.36
female
35.5
118.5
0.5
0.5
25
0
17
0.5
269
270
adult
271
adult
272
subadult
273
undetermined
45
0.25
57
0.75
274
275
adult
276
adult
277
subadult
278
adult
279
adult
undetermined
280
adult
female?
281
adult
282
adult
283
subadult
284
adult
20
24
45
55
undetermined
32.5
0.33
21
42.5
0.67
28
male
77.5
42
51
4.01
103
-0.34
76.5
75.5
3.32
83
70
2.8
male?
79.5
75
3.78
male
77.5
71.5
3.35
undetermined
male
76
123
1.16
80.5
115.5
2.09

Burial
No.
Age
a
Category
285
adult
286
subadult
287
adult
288
adult
289
subadult
290
adult
291
subadult
292
adult
293
adult
294
subadult
295
adult
296
infant
297
adult
298
subadult
299
adult
300
infant
301
adult
301a
Low
Age
High
Age
20
30
4.4
18
8.5
female
undetermined
Grid South
80.5
75
Grid East
Elevation
64
3.57
126
0.61
male
73.5
53
3.63
undetermined
74.5
120
1.61
undetermined
81
125
1.73
45
55
male
84
114
2.32
undetermined
82.5
94
4.01
undetermined
72.5
121
1.93
male?
82.5
94
3.55
0.5
30
0.5
30
20
Sex
undetermined
88
86.5
4.19
50
female
82
70
2.59
undetermined
84
98
4.20
2.9
male
62.5
117.5
0.04
undetermined
66.5
123
1.99
male
68.5
123.5
1.32
undetermined
76
125.5
0.82
undetermined
86
100.5
4.17
undetermined
undetermined
86
100.5
302
adult
female?
88.5
99.5
303
subadult
0.5
undetermined
73.5
76.5
304
subadult
undetermined
81.5
109
1.97
305
infant
-0.33
0.33
undetermined
57
122
-1.11
306
adult
28
44
male
76.5
125
0.10
307
adult
45
55
male?
82.5
115.5
2.02
308
subadult
84.5
109
1.31
309
adult
20
25
male
62
143.5
1.89
310
adult
44
52
female
75.5
60
2.49
311
subadult
312
0.67
40
40
1.33
50
undetermined
3.96
0.25
0.75
undetermined
88.5
99.5
3.41
infant
0.3
undetermined
75
67
3.38
313
adult
45
55
male
31.5
114.5
314
adult
40
50
male
82
134
315
adult
30
40
female
83
127
316
adult
18
20
female
88.5
317
adult
19
39
male?
91.5
220
2.21
318
subadult
14
undetermined
78
144
1.95
319
adult
88.5
249
2.25
320
subadult
undetermined
90
251.5
1.73
321
subadult
undetermined
79.5
143
0.39
322
adult
female
64.5
140
2.47
323
adult
45
128.5
7.5
female
19
30
male
99.5
-1.5
1.41
3.02
Burial
No.
Age
a
Category
324
Low
Age
High
Age
adult
25
35
female
325
adult
25
35
326
adult
45
327
adult
328
adult
329
adult
Sex
Grid South
Grid East
Elevation
69
132
1.83
male
63.5
137.5
0.89
55
male
73.5
135
35
45
male
48.5
129
40
50
female
84.5
241
male
56
128.5
undetermined
56
128.5
58.5
140
0.72
58
137
0.52
329.1
adult
330
adult
28
58
male
331
adult
30
35
undetermined
332
adult
35
40
male?
80.5
126
0.67
333
adult
45
55
male
81.5
230.5
1.14
334
subadult
89
251
1.63
335
adult
84.5
248
0.36
336
subadult
0.68
337
adult
338
adult
339
subadult
340
adult
341
adult
342
adult
25
35
female?
343
adult
19
23
344
adult
25
35
345
adult
346
adult
347
subadult
348
subadult
349
infant
350
undetermined
351
adult
352
adult
353
adult
24
354
adult
35
undetermined
25
35
female
undetermined
83
125.5
40
50
male
37
130
33
65
0.5
female
-0.67
84.5
133.5
0.69
83
123
1.39
female
88.5
236.5
0.27
male
87.5
229.5
1.26
50
129
-0.73
male
59.5
130
-0.02
male?
87.5
255
0.84
undetermined
74.5
254
0.52
70
female
57.5
138.5
0.5
undetermined
73.5
130
0.97
undetermined
66
138
1.62
0.5
undetermined
72
132
1.64
undetermined
82
133.5
1.18
male
84.5
145
0.39
male
67.5
131
1.47
34
male
84.5
230
1.13
45
male
44.5
129.5
undetermined
39.3
50
50
64.4
60
-0.25
-1.16
355
adult
undetermined
74.5
235
3.19
356
subadult
undetermined
84.5
248
-0.01
357
adult
72
228.5
-0.31
358
45
65
adult
male
female?
89.5
230
1.93
84.5
127.5
1.47
75.5
235
0.24
male
88.5
249
0.77
undetermined
69.5
235
-0.81
359
360
361
adult
362
adult
33
57

Burial
No.
Age
a
Category
Low
Age
High
Age
Sex
363
subadult
undetermined
49.5
135
-0.35
364
adult
25
35
male
44.5
143.5
-0.23
365
adult
79.5
257.5
-0.06
366
adult
34
62
undetermined
78
224
0.73
367
adult
25
35
female?
72
130
2.08
368
subadult
10.5
13.5
80.5
246.5
0.86
369
adult
40
50
male
54
131
370
subadult
undetermined
82
146.5
371
adult
25
35
female
69
235
-2.88
372
adult
25
35
female
81
235
1.91
373
adult
45
60
female
70.5
132
-0.97
374
infant
72
132.5
375
adult
16
18
female
74.5
253
376
adult
45
65
male
77
134.5
377
adult
32.6
57.8
female
75.5
235
-0.44
378
undetermined
undetermined
75.5
235
-0.28
379
adult
30
40
male
71.5
215
0.16
380
adult
40
60
male
85
241
0.51
381
undetermined
undetermined
75.5
235
-0.68
382
subadult
undetermined
71.5
215
0.17
383
adult
14
18
female
79
245
-0.76
384
adult
25
45
female
91.5
248
0.59
385
adult
40
60
female
86
251.5
0.83
386
infant
undetermined
48
121.5
0.37
387
adult
34
44
male
78
227
-0.25
388
adult
29
57
female
75.5
222
-0.38
389
adult
female
82
220
1.87
390
adult
25
35
male
71.5
140
1.41
391
male
68
140.5
1.69
female
0.25
0.3
adult
16.5
19.5
392
adult
42.5
52.5
393
infant
-0.17
394
adult
16
395
adult
43
396
subadult
397
adult
30
40
398
adult
25
35
399
infant
400
adult
25
35
402
adult
403
adult
39
65
6.5
undetermined
undetermined
Grid East
Elevation
-0.21
0.79
1.36
-0.4
0.45
71.5
140
1.04
84
211
2.54
25
undetermined
59.5
185
-0.59
53
male
76.5
135.5
-1.11
undetermined
82.5
224
1.43
female
87
229
0.51
undetermined
93
255.5
0.67
undetermined
78
213
-0.08
65.5
130
2.09
84.5
235
1.06
93
255.5
1.12
8.5
0.3
male
undetermined
undetermined
0.17
male
Grid South
male
Burial
No.
Age
a
Category
404
adult
405
subadult
406
infant
408
Low
Age
High
Age
Sex
Grid South
Grid East
Elevation
female
79.5
165
undetermined
83.9
211.8
2.22
undetermined
68.25
253.5
0.02
adult
male?
79.5
158
0.5
410
adult
female
69.5
178
1.05
412
infant
undetermined
78.5
218.5
2.10
413
adult
50
70
female
62.5
175.5
0.97
414
adult
39
59
male
74
165
0.97
415
adult
35
55
male
81
215
1.81
416
adult
undetermined
71.5
142
1.28
417
subadult
undetermined
64.5
165
1.14
418
adult
30
55
male
64.5
163
0.86
419
adult
48
62
male
71.5
206.5
0.4
420
adult
35
45
male
69.5
186.5
0.63
9.5
10
0.5
14.5
422
86.5
212.5
2.22
423h
67
162
0.74
76
220
-1.07
79.1
253
0.35
69.5
141
1.52
424
adult
undetermined
425
adult
female
426
427
428
adult
16
20
male?
69.5
179
0.28
adult
40
70
female
1.57
66.5
147.5
429
64.5
215
430
84.5
215
431
adult
undetermined
79.5
162
0.48
432
adult
undetermined
78
220
-0.89
433h
79.5
160.5
79.5
155
84.5
205
434
435
2.64
Low and high ages reflect the range of possible ages determined by the skeletal biological team. Blanks indicate age
range could not be determined from the remains. To be consistent with the skeletal analysis, in this table, infant includes individuals calculated as 6 months of age or less; subadult includes those over 6 months and under 15 years of
age. Age calculation is described in Chapter 4 of Volume 1 of this series, Skeletal Biology of the New York African
Burial Ground.
b
In the Sex column, a question mark indicates a probable assignment.
c
Grid coordinates (see the site map, Figure 7) are in feet, and elevations are feet above mean sea level (AMSL) for the
highest skeletal element (or coffin remains if no skeletal elements were present).
d
Remains appear to belong with Burial 43.
e
No remains extant.
f
This coffin was empty.
g
Remains appear to belong to Burial 280.
h
Remains were left in place.
i
Remains were left in place (presumed adult).

packed in bags or small containers and sent to the
project conservators (see below). Shaft fill artifacts
and coffin remains (nails and wood) were bagged and
sent to the HCI laboratory facility (until July 1992)
or to a storage space provided by GSA.
Soil samples were taken from the grave-shaft-fill
soil (as a control sample), the coffin lid area, the
stomach area, the thoracic area, the pelvic area, and
the sacrum. Not all of these samples were taken from
all burials. Thoracic samples were added to the field
protocol in late May 1992. The control samples were
taken so that (1)soils could be tested for plant remains,
providing information on the historic landscape, and
(2)to obtain pH levels and observe any insect remains
in the soil as aids to understanding bone condition.6
The other samples were taken so that macrobotanical, palynology, and parasitology analyses could be
conducted to provide potential information about the
diet and health of the deceased and about plants that
might have been used in mortuary practices.
Specific locations of control samples were generally
not recorded, and it is often not known for individual
burials whether these were taken from above, below,
or alongside the coffin or skeleton, although the date
of the sample, if recorded, can inform us as to whether
it was taken before or after the skeleton was exposed
and recorded. During the cataloging of samples, bag
labels (which were somewhat inconsistent) provided
the only information on sample locations. Samples
were sent from the field site to HCI or JMA laboratory
facilities for storage.
Certain in-field conservation procedures were
designed to minimize damage to human bone and
artifacts that occurred once they were exposed to the
air. Very fragile bones, including frequently those of
infants and young children, were pedestaled during
excavationthat is, the soil surrounding them was
left in place and removed as a block. If soil showed
signs of bacterial microbes, a mild biocide (70percent
ethanol) was applied to the pedestal. In a few cases, a
consolidant, polyvinyl acetate (PVA) emulsion, was
used for long bones. In some instances, field notes
indicate that wet paper towels were placed on skeletal
Neither testing of pH levels nor insect identification was undertaken.
Chemical analysis was deemed unfeasible because too much time
had elapsed between the initial collection and the initiation of the
subcontracting work. Insect remains were not identified in the soil
analysis conducted thus far, but their study through future analysis
of retained light fractions may be possible if specific questions about
decomposition need to be addressed (none was posed by the current
research team).
6
remains to keep them moist during excavation and

recording of the burial, but it is not known whether
this was standard procedure. Artifacts that were particularly fragile were frozen along with surrounding
soil. Plastic was first placed over the bone, then dry ice
was applied to the artifact, and the block, when frozen,
was lifted out and transported to freezers in the laboratory facility. There is no list of items for which dry ice
was used, although some instances are described in
the field records for individual burials and are noted
in the descriptions in Part2 of this volume.
Fieldwork was halted on July29, 1992, and GSA
decided to preserve remaining graves at the project
site rather than excavate further. However, at that
time, 16burials had been identified in the ground but
had not been removed; in some, the skeletal remains
were partially exposed. These burials were covered
with vermiculite and soil pending GSAs decisions,
in consultation with the project archaeologists, as to
whether they would be removed or left in place. Excavation of 11partially exposed burials was resumed
in September 1992, and their skeletal remains were
removed for analysis.
Field Recording
As at any archaeological site, field recording varied with the individual excavators. At the New York
African Burial Ground, there was also an evolution
in recordation standards: the first burials recovered
were not always drawn adequately, for example, and
field forms specifically designed for burial removal
were adopted only midway through the project. On
the other hand, later in the field project, some burials
had only the minimum data recorded on the site forms,
with no additional notes.
Each burial was recorded on its own forms and
drawings, and individual drawings were then transferred to site maps. The maps were sometimes, but
not always, clear as to superposition of burials. The
stratigraphic relationships among groups of overlapping burials were not usually mentioned in the
excavators notes, which focused on the individual
burial. There are no extant field notes taken by the
archaeologists who supervised burial excavations,
which might have discussed overall site stratigraphy.
Soil descriptions were sometimes, but not always,
provided on field forms, but the grave-shaft-fill soil
was not differentiated from the coffin in-fill, and the
surrounding soil matrix is rarely described.
Forms
Forms were completed for every burial excavated,
but several different forms were adopted over the
course of the project. Examples of forms used by
HCI, JMA, and MFAT are provided in AppendixD,
Part3 of this volume. The field forms are retained in
the project archive; HCI and JMA forms also were
transcribed into a database and are available in the
digital archive. Up until mid-April 1992, each burial
was recorded on both a Provenience Sheet and a
Burial Form. The Provenience Sheet also provided
a grid for a sketch, and in many cases the excavators
produced here a rough sketch of the grave outline,
the coffin top, or even the skeletal remains. A Burial
Procedures Checklist was added in April 1992. This
form listed all possible samples and indicated whether
they had been collected; it also included specific
information on how associated artifacts were stored.
Unfortunately, the Provenience Sheet was discontinued, and although most information was contained
on other forms, some items were no longer recorded,
including soil descriptions and opening sketches.
MFAT field-assessment forms provided an overall
descriptive assessment of the condition and position of
remains and also listed individual skeletal elements,
noting presence/absence and condition. These forms
also included preliminary sex, age, race, and pathology assessments.
Drawings
A scaled plan drawing was made for each burial in
situ, after skeletal remains had been exposed and
cleaned, prior to removal (see Part2 of this volume
for drawings). Early in the fieldwork, each excavator prepared his or her own burial plan drawings.
Subsequently, crew members with particular ability
were assigned work as field artists with responsibility
for the in situ drawings. One artist/archaeologist in
particular, Ms.Margo Schur (now Margo Meyer of
the Anthropological Studies Center at Sonoma State
University), executed drawings of exceptional quality
and detail. In addition to the final burial drawings, in
some cases opening sketches or detail sketches were
drawn by excavators, most often on the field forms
as noted above. On occasion, schematic drawings of
coffins were executed. Field drawings were produced
using a scale of 1inch to 1foot (with only a few
exceptions).
For most burial drawings, individual skeletal elements and other items (coffin remains and, in some
cases, artifacts) were plotted vertically as well as horizontally. As noted, vertical measurements were taken
in hundredths of feet from a series of site subdatum
points. Depths below datum for skeletal remains were
typically taken at the cranium, shoulders, elbows,
innominates (hipbones), sacrum, knees, ankles, feet,
and central vertebrae. Vertical measurements also were
taken typically for the top and bottom of the coffin
(either wood remains or nails) and for some artifacts
found with skeletal remains. The complete list of field
drawings is included in the project database.
As noted, individual burial drawings were traced
onto larger site maps, also at a scale of 1inch to 1foot.
In the western part of the cemetery, skeletal drawings
were traced, but later in the excavation (i.e.,farther
east) only grave-shaft and coffin outlines were traced
onto the maps. The earliest of these maps also show
depths below datum points and give descriptions of
soils intervening between graves, but most do not. A
problem with the site maps is the difficulty in resolving issues of superposition; it is not always possible
to tell which burial underlay another when more than
one interment overlapped. In some parts of the site,
maps were made of broad areas prior to excavation
of graves, showing suspected grave-shaft outlines,
surrounding soil, and coffin stains where visible.
These are useful for reconstructing some of the soil
descriptions for burials and for checking burial relationships. Unfortunately, the text on the surviving
copies of these maps is mostly illegible (see section
on September11, 2001).
Photographs
Field photographs were taken of each burial in situ
at the New York African Burial Ground. Redundant
sets of 35-mm slides and black-and-white negatives
were produced. Each photograph has a menu board
with the burial number and date, a trowel pointing to
grid north, and a range pole marked in feet. In some
cases, detail photographs were also taken of particular
artifacts or skeletal elements in situ. The complete list
of field photographs is included in the project database. Photographs were retained in the archaeological
laboratory and used for site analysis.
Laboratory Processing and Analysis

A laboratory facility for nonskeletal material was
provided by GSA at the World Trade Center in Sep-

tember 1992, following the close of fieldwork.7 Prior
to that, artifacts from the burials had been stored at
HCIs facility in New Jersey, with the exception of
items that were found in direct association with skeletal remains, including pins, buttons, beads, textile
fragments, jewelry, and other metal objects. These
had been sent to the South Street Seaports laboratory in lower Manhattan. The museums conservator,
Gary McGowan, conducted initial conservation where
necessary; he later became JMAs laboratory director at the World Trade Center. Material stored at the
Seaport and the HCI facility was brought to the new
laboratory in September 1992.
The laboratory was staffed and directed by JMA,
which was responsible under the terms of its contract
with GSA for the processing of all collections from the
Foley Square Project. When the Howard University
Archaeology Team began work on the project in 1993,
JMA continued to conduct the laboratory processing.
Warren Perry of Central Connecticut State University
was appointed associate director for archaeology for
the Howard team in 1996 and took over supervision of
the processing along with Laboratory Director Leonard
Bianchi. Jean Howson, a member of the research team,
was added as a co-director of the laboratory in 1998.
The New York African Burial Ground archaeological analysis required different procedures and a separate database from those being developed for the rest
of the Foley Square Project, which were of necessity
more geared to the extremely artifact-rich Courthouse
(Five Points) Site. The burial ground assemblage was
relatively small in size, and artifact categories were
completely different because of the mortuary context. For example, domestic artifact categories (e.g.,
food preparation or health and hygiene), along
with the myriad functional, typological, and stylistic
subcategories used for a large domestic assemblage,
were irrelevant to the analysis of burials and burialrelated artifacts. The burial ground procedures had
to be designed to ensure that individual graves or
components of graves could be distinguished from
others or grouped for various kinds of analysis, to
ensure that everything from each grave could ultimately be reunited, and to ensure that only those items
meant to accompany the deceased were reinterred with
Collections from excavations at both of the Foley Square sites
the Broadway blockBlock154, including burial and nonburial
contextsand the Courthouse blockBlock160 and the Five Points
Sitewere processed and analyzed at the 6World Trade Center
facility. For the Five Points Site, see Yamin (2000).
7
the remains. Moreover, we deliberately chose not to

assign broad functional categories to artifacts, as we
wished to remain openand leave our assemblage
opento interpretation. Eventually, a number of the
tasks originally assigned to JMA were transferred to
Howard University, including completion of New
York African Burial Ground artifact inventories and
samples processing. Procedures were overhauled so
that all collections made during the excavations and
all records associated with them could be accurately
tracked. An easily accessible database using a standard
commercial application was deemed adequate for our
tracking and data management needs and was used in
lieu of the complex and proprietary database developed
by a JMA subconsultant for the Five Points site.
Procedures
Provenience Controls
As noted, a single catalog number was used to label
all material from any given burial, whether from
the grave surface, shaft fill, coffin, or coffin interior,
including all soil samples. This kind of lumping is
highly unusual in archaeological practice. Because
analysis and, importantly, eventual reburial required
differentiation of all of these kinds of excavation contexts, a plan was developed by the Howard University
Archaeology Team to assign numbers to all items and
samples in the collection that would serve as indices to
more precise provenience. The catalog numbers were
retained and extensions added as listed in Table3.
Our goal was to prevent further loss of provenience
information as processing progressed.
The need for adequate provenience controls for
the collection was related to the need for an adequate
database with which to record collections information. With the catalog numbers assigned, it would be
possible to track artifacts and samples for individual
burials and to retrieve information on similar contexts
for all burials. The database is described in a subsequent section.
Artifacts that were directly associated with skeletal remains were not physically labeled with provenience indicators. These items were slated for eventual
reburial and were not physically altered in any way
other than to stabilize them.8 JMA laboratory staff did
The single exception was a silver pendant that was sampled to
determine metallic content (see Chapter13).
8
Table 3. Explanation of Catalog Numbers
Extension
Provenience
Explanation
-B
burial
-CL
coffin lid
This extension was given to items that were recorded as being on the coffin lid.
Examples are tacks and pieces of shell.
-CH
coffin hardware
Designates iron nails, tacks, and other hardware that clearly came from the coffin of the deceased. Discrete lots (bags) of nails were assigned consecutive letters, as in -CHA, -CHB, -CHC, in order to retain all possible provenience information. The letters were assigned in order of the date on the bag.
-CW
coffin wood
This was used for wood samples or soil scrapings from wood stains that clearly
came from the coffin of the deceased. Discrete lots (bags) of wood were given
consecutive letters, as in -CWA, -CWB, -CWC, in order to retain all possible
provenience information. The letters were assigned in order of the date on the
bag; individual bags sometimes indicated whether the sample was from the lid,
sides, or bottom.
-GF
grave fill
-S
soil sample
This extension was used for the skeletal remains themselves and for all items
believed to be in direct association with skeletal remains. Examples are pins,
buttons, or beads.
This was used to designate material that was in the grave-shaft-fill soil rather
than in direct association with the skeletal remains or inside the coffin.
This was used for all soil samples from a burial. Discrete soil samples were given
consecutive letters, as in -SA, -SB, -SC, to reflect soil taken from different
places within a burial. The letters were assigned in order of the date on the bag;
individual bags typically indicated where the sample was from. Soil samples
that were processed by flotation were in turn given an L, H, or U as well,
to designate light fraction, heavy fraction, or unfloated subsample (thus -SAL, SAH, -SAU).
label artifacts from grave-shaft-fill contexts, which

were not expected to be reburied, except for kiln
waste, kiln furniture, and items less than approximately 1inch in size. Labels were written in black ink
and include the site number (6980), catalog number
(without extension), and burial number. Items with
and without labels were retained in polyethylene
bags with full catalog numbers written on the bags,
as were soil samples.
Cleaning, Conservation, and Storage

Project conservators were Gary McGowan and
Cheryl LaRoche of JMA. Conservation procedures
for each category of material are described in appropriate artifact chapters (Chapters 1014) and in a
draft report prepared by JMA.9 Typically, conservators examined and cleaned only those items that
The report (LaRoche 2002) was made available for use by the
Howard University team during our analysis.
9
were recovered from within coffins or in direct

association with skeletal remains (these items came
to be referred to as burial artifacts), although
they oversaw the processing of grave-shaft and
coffin materials as well. In addition, the conservators examined a selection of wood samples from
coffins. Many of the wood samples (apparently the
best ones from each burial) along with other organic
samples were stored in freezers when first brought
in from the field.10 The freezers and their contents
were brought to the World Trade Center laboratory
in September 1992.
Burial artifacts were placed in inert polyethylene
boxes with inert packing, and many were placed in
display cases in the laboratory once stabilized. Items
that were not on display were kept in metal storage
cabinets.
Many boxes of wood samples were not frozen, and these consisted
in large part of soil with wood fragments, probably scraped off as
samples during excavation.
10

Items from grave-shaft-fill contexts and coffin
remains were cleaned, sorted and bagged by materialwood, glass, metal, ceramic, and faunaland
placed in cardboard storage boxes. Bags were of
polyethylene, and tyvek tags were placed in each bag
indicating burial number and material. Ceramics, nails,
and glass were washed in a weak nonionic detergent
solution and rinsed in plain water, then cleaned with a
soft-bristle brush. For shell, adhering soil was soaked
in a 50percent ethanol solution and removed.
Inventory
All artifacts examined by the project conservators
(i.e.,those found in direct association with skeletal
remains) were inventoried by them and entered into a
conservation data table (this was ultimately converted
to Microsoft Access and merged with the artifact
inventory data table currently in use). Coffin hardware
and material from grave-shaft-fill soils were identified
and inventoried by Howard University laboratory staff
under the direction of Leonard Bianchi. Bianchi also
reexamined and further described artifacts that had
been inventoried by the conservators. Animal bone
from grave-shaft contexts was examined and inventoried by JMA subconsultant Marie Lorraine Pipes.
All inventories are contained in AppendixE, Part3 of
this volume. Stoneware from grave shafts was further
examined, and subconsultant Meta Janowitz made a
more detailed inventory (see AppendixF, Part3 of
this volume).
Unique artifacts deriving from contexts in direct
association with skeletal remains (typically those treated
by conservators) were given consecutive arbitrary
numbers (point numbers) within each provenience
that can be appended to the catalog number and allow
reference to unique items. For example, individual
unique artifacts from Burial6 were assigned Catalog
Nos.219-B.001, 219-B.002, 219-B.003, etc. These
numbers do not necessarily correspond to the numbers
assigned by conservators, because the latter were given
to groups of artifacts rather than to individual items,
and, in many cases, the archaeologists wished to further
differentiate the items and describe them in greater
particularity. (In some cases, groups of identical items
still share a number.) Whenever possible, burial artifact
point numbers assigned in the field were used as the
artifact numbers for the inventory.
Soil Samples
Many hundreds of soil samples were taken during
field excavations, and three different teams were
involved in analyzing them (AppendixG, Part3 of

this volume contains the methods and results of the
various reports). Some of the samples from burial
contexts were processed by William Sandy of HCI
from December 1991 through July 1992 (a total
of 428samples). These samples were from coffin
lids and interiors and stomach and pelvic areas. A
drum flotation device was used. Heavy and light
fractions were sorted, and inventory and analysis
was underway as of the end of June 1992, when
HCI was replaced by JMA as GSAs consulting
archaeological firm. Bone fragments recovered in
heavy fractions were sent to the Lehman laboratory
(those later determined to be animal bone rather than
human were returned to the New York laboratory
for faunal analysis). Artifacts from heavy fractions
and bags containing the light fractions were stored
at the World Trade Center laboratory along with the
other collections from the excavation. These were
subsequently inventoried by Howard University
laboratory staff. 11
The hundreds of soil samples that were not floated
by HCI, including all control samples, were stored at
the World Trade Center laboratory. These were inventoried by the Howard University Archaeology Team
laboratory staff. Soil that had not been screened at
all in the field was screened in the laboratory through
-inch mesh in order to recover artifacts and human
bone. Human bone was sent to the Skeletal Biology
Team at Howard University, and artifacts were inventoried. Under the direction of the Howard University
archaeologists, all as-yet-unfloated soil samples were
next divided into two parts, one for flotation and one
to remain unfloated for other types of analysis. The
-U (unfloated) portions were typically less than
1liter in size. If a sample was too small to partition,
it was retained unfloated. The inventory was updated
to indicate the splitting of samples. JMA retained
New South Associates to complete the flotation of
all soil samples.
New South Associates was also retained for macrobotanic, palynology, and parasitology pilot studies.
The samples used in the pilot studies were selected
by Howard Universitys Project Scientific Director
William Sandy analyzed and inventoried 43 of the samples that he
had floated (i.e.,he picked or sorted and then identified botanical
remains from the light fractions). This inventory was not salvaged after
the collapse of the World Trade Center on September11, 2001, and
no copy is known to exist (William Sandy, personal communication
2003). The fractions selected subsequently by Howard University for
analysis were therefore reinventoried by New South Associates.
11
Blakey. No parasite data were preserved in any of the
samples studied. However, both macrobotanical and
pollen studies proved useful in identifying species
of plants from coffin lid and pelvic contexts. The
Howard University Archaeology Team decided to
pursue both macrobotanical and pollen analyses for
a larger sample of burials. Individual soil samples
(some already floated) were selected by the Howard
University Archaeology Team laboratory staff during the spring and summer of 2003. The samples
were selected using several criteria, specifically site
location, age and sex of the deceased, hypothesized
period of interment, and confidence in the sample
provenience. Our aim was to obtain an accurate subsample of the burial population along all of these
parameters. Leslie Raymer of New South Associates performed the macrobotanical study, and Pat
Fall (Arizona State University) and Gerald Kelso
performed the pollen study. Data are incorporated
into the analysis presented in the body of the report,
specifically in Chapters35 and 14.
Records
Database
Archaeological analysis requires integration of data
on artifacts with data on archaeological contexts. The
database designed for the archaeological component of
the New York African Burial Ground project includes
a number of data tables that contain uncoded information on individual burials, artifacts, and samples
and can be linked by burial number or by catalog
number. The basic burial, artifact, and photography
logs originally created by JMA in dBase were subsequently converted to Paradox and substantially altered
and enlarged by the Howard University Archaeology
Teams laboratory staff. These tables were finally converted to Microsoft Access in 2003, during the final
phase of analysis. Key tables in the current database
are listed in Table4, and their structures are explained
in AppendixH, Part3 of this volume. The database
will be available along with all project records at the
Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture in
New York.
Artifact Photographs
Selected artifacts (typically items conservators referred
to as burial artifacts that had been found in direct
association with skeletal remains, excluding coffin
wood and hardware) were photographed by staff of

JMA during laboratory processing and analysis from
1992 to 1995. Some were photographed before, during, and after conservation treatment. In addition to
35-mm slides and black-and-white negatives, microscopic digital photographs were produced to aid in
identification for a few items, for example, textile/
hair fragments and wood samples.
A second set of artifact photographs, consisting
of 35-mm slides and black-and-white negatives, was
taken during 1997 at the World Trade Center laboratory by JMA staff. Only one set of the slides and one
set of negatives were produced. Neither was recovered after the collapse of the World Trade Center on
September11, 2001.
In the summer of 2001, GSA planned reburial of
skeletal remains and burial artifacts, prompting the
production of a third and final set of 35-mm photographic slides. This was considered necessary because,
in the opinion of the Howard University Archaeology
Team, the previous sets of artifact photographs were
inadequate as a record of the items that could serve
future research and exhibit purposes once the materials themselves were reburied. Preparations for the
reburial were rushed (though ultimately the planned
August17, 2001, date was cancelled), and little time
was allowed for the final inventory and photo-recordation of artifacts. The services of photographer Jon
Abbott were secured, and he produced a full set of
high-quality color slides, although typically just one
or two photos were taken for each item.
Finally, prior to the 2003 reburial, digital photographs were taken of a large subset of the artifacts
from direct burial contexts. The high-resolution digital
technology now available (through Jon Abbott) made
it possible to produce numerous digital images of each
artifact, from several angles. These are now available
for future research. An example is produced in Figure8. Artifact photographs are included in the project
archive, which will be housed at the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture in New York.
Artifact photographs reproduced in this report
include images from 35-mm slides as well as digital
images. In some cases, the ruler placed in the photographic frame to provide scale (there were at least
three separate rulers used during the various photo
sessions) is visible in its entirety, but in most of the
close-up photographs, only the tick marks on the
ruler are visible. The smallest tick-mark interval on
the rulers is 0.5mm, unless otherwise noted. In some
photographs this interval is all that shows. In other

Table 4. Data Tables in Archaeological Database
Table Name
ABGCAT
ABG_DPTS
add faun
ARTPHOTOS
burial4
Coffin size
conbur 3
Contents
Provenience catalog for the Broadway site, including all burial and nonburial contexts. This
is a list of catalog numbers and all of the provenience data they represent (features, burials,
dates of excavation, excavators, etc.).
Locations and elevations of temporary subdatum points used in the field.
Inventory of animal bone from grave-shaft-fill contexts.
List of photographs of artifacts taken in 1998 (destroyed September 11, 2001).
Basic data on each burial.
Coffin dimensions for each burial.
Inventory of all artifacts that were directly associated with skeletal remains, coffin hardware,
and material (other than floral and faunal remains) from grave fill contexts.
DRAWINGS
List of all numbered drawings from the Broadway site.
NewPinTable
List of straight pins from burials by location.
NOTES
Transcribed information and notes from burial-excavation field forms.
PHOTOBKS
List of photographs of in situ burials.
PHOTOLOG
List of photographs taken in the field and of conserved artifacts.
SHELLFLOR
Inventory of shell and seeds from burial contexts.
Stoneware
Inventory of local stonewares from grave-shaft-fill contexts.
SOILSAMP
Inventory of all soil samples with information on processing to date.
TOTWOOD
Inventory of wood samples from coffins.
photographs, the 1-mm, 0.5-cm, and 1-cmticks are

also visible. We have left the rulers in the images, but
rather than label the tick marks on each, we have provided the size of the photographed item or items in the
caption. Where no single dimension was measurable,
we have stated the ruler interval in the caption.
Replicas
In August 2003, shortly before the planned reburial,
archaeologists from the National Park Service (within
their capacity as consultants to GSA on the future Interpretive Center for the African Burial Ground) solicited
bids for replication of artifacts. Only items that had been
found in direct association with the deceasedand
among these, only items that were sufficiently intact to
possibly be used in interpretationwere included in the
assemblage targeted for potential replication. Colonial
Williamsburg was contracted to prepare replicas; they
selected a limited subset based on their resources and
expertise (Table5). Full recordation of the items was
completed by the specialists who made the replicas.
Because of the timing of preparations for the reinterThe New York African Burial Ground
ment, these items were not photographed digitally.

Insufficient time remained to solicit subcontractors
to replicate the remaining artifacts or record them for
replication prior to the reburial. However, photographs
and descriptive information can be used as the basis
for future replication of additional artifacts. Some
artifacts were not given priority for replication because
they are types that can be represented by virtually
identical, and readily obtainable, examples. This is
the case for the beads and the coins. An example of
one of the replications, copper alloy straight pins, is
shown in Figure9. Several replicas were made of
each item selected.
September 11, 2001

The New York African Burial Ground archaeological
laboratory in the subbasement level of 6World Trade
Center was left partially intact following the collapse
of the towers and other surrounding buildings on
September11, 2001. In October 2001, in advance of
Figure 8. Example of a digital photographic series of an artifact (Burial 366, Catalog No. 1830.002). The images shown here are
from low-resolution copies; high-resolution digital images are part of the project archive (photographs by Jon Abbott).
demolition of the damaged structure, GSA and the

Federal Emergency Management Agency coordinated
efforts to recover material from the laboratory. A
salvage team entered the facility and retrieved many
boxes of artifacts and surviving documents. The
degree of retrieval is considered remarkable, considering the overall damage to the space; however,
some artifacts and documents were not salvaged.
Categories of materials that are known to have been
lost are enumerated in Table6. Individual items that
were lost (but had already been inventoried) are
identified in the artifact inventory, AppendixE, Part3
of this volume.
Archaeological materials that were salvaged were
decontaminated, rebagged in some cases (original bags
were retained, however, and kept with the materials),
and reboxed by a GSA contractor. Records that were
salvaged (namely the slide and photo negative collections) were also decontaminated and placed in new
binders. A new laboratory was set up at 1Bowling

Green in New York. When the Howard University
team resumed archaeological work in 2003, the boxes
were examined, and some errors made by the decontamination team when labeling the new bags were
noted and corrected.
Fortunately, as of July31, 2001, items that had
been selected by GSA at that time for reburial
had been packed and shipped off-site (to Artex,
an arts-handling firm with facilities in Landover,
Maryland). These included the artifacts thought
to have been placed directly with the deceased in
each burial, and thus all such items were saved.
However, some of the materials left behind in the
laboratory and later lost on September11 belonged
to categories of material that were subsequently
added to the reburial plans (see below), such as
coffin remains and excess soil from samples. Therefore, when ultimately reburied on October4, 2003,

Table 5. Items Selected for Replication
Burial
No.
6
10
Items
original documentation of the excavations of burials,

especially the excavators notes and in situ drawings,
is invaluable.
1 large button (plain face), Catalog

No. 219-B.008
Reburial
1 button, Catalog No. 234-B.004
12/14 12 straight pins, Catalog Nos. 253B.001, 253-B.002, 253-B.003, 274B.001, 274-B.002, and 274-B.003
71
1 finger ring, Catalog No. 813-B.004
147
7 small rings, Catalog No. 892-B.004
158
cuff links, 1 pair, Catalog No. 903B.001
181
2 buttons, Catalog Nos. 967-B.005 and

967-B.006
211
cuff-link or button face, enameled,

Catalog No. 1186-B.001
214
238
cuff links, 1 pair, Catalog No. 1224B.001
250
254
1 silver pendant, Catalog No. 1243B.001
310
1 paste ring (with glass insets), Catalog

No. 1486-B.001
313
371
2 cuff-link faces, enameled, Catalog

No. 1875-B.001
392
4 buttons, all assigned Catalog

No. 2039-B.002
398
1 finger ring, Catalog No. 2061-B.001
403
1 button, Catalog Nos. 2067-B.003
405
415
some individuals were missing materials that had

been recovered from their original graves, typically
coffin remains (nails and wood).
Also fortunate was the storage of all original,
individual burial field records at the Cobb Laboratory at Howard University. Copies of these records
were in the World Trade Center laboratory (they
were not salvaged after September 11), and a set
was also kept at GSAs New York offices, but the
The MOA entered into by GSA, the ACHP, and the

LPC stipulated that human remains and burial associated artifacts were to be reinterred. As plans were
developed for the reinterment that took place in October 2003, decisions had to be made as to exactly what
materials were included in this mandate. Of course,
the skeletal remains were always intended to be reburied, although small samples of bone were retained
for future analyses. Confusion about artifacts arose,
however, because the phrase burial artifacts had
been used early on in the conservation laboratory to
refer only to those items that had been placed in direct
association with the deceased. Project conservators
had estimated that there were 500such items. Yet the
coffin remains themselves (wood and hardware) were
also clearly burial associated.
More problematic were items found in grave-shaftfill soils. Because there was no remnant of the original
ground surface over most of the site (see Chapter3),
there was no way of determining whether artifacts in
the soils had at one time been placed on a grave.12 For
the most part, material found in the shafts of graves is
believed to have been present in the soil matrix that
was used to fill the graves at the time of the interment.
Thus, it is material that lay strewn on the surface or in
shallow deposits covering the ground when the grave
was originally dug. Some of this material represents a
thin, scattered deposit of common eighteenth-century
refuse, including glass and ceramic sherds, bits of
brick and nails, fragments of animal bone, and so
forth. In one area of the site, there was a good deal
of animal bone thought to be waste material, perhaps
from a nearby tannery. But by far, the most ubiquitous
class of grave-shaft material is stoneware-kiln debris
(sherds from broken pots, kiln waste, and kiln furniture). The latter material is basically industrial waste
from pottery kilns that stood on the burial ground in
the eighteenth century (see Chapters2 and 4).
In the end, GSA made a decision to exclude artifacts
that were found in grave-shaft fill from reburial. This
In some cases, artifacts appeared to excavators to be directly on
the coffin lid, and when such items are thought possibly to have been
placed there deliberately, they have been included in the reburial.
12
Figure 9. (a) Copper alloy straight pin as recovered in the field

(photograph by Jon Abbott); (b) replicas of African Burial Ground
pins created by artisans at Colonial Williamsburg (photograph by Rob
Tucher).
decision was arrived at after discussions among representatives of the public (who attended public meetings
on the subject), GSA, the Howard University research
team, and the National Park Service (in its role as
consultant to GSA on the future Interpretive Center
and disposition of the collection). Our reasoning was
that these materials were not deliberately placed with
the deceased, do not represent actions on the part of
mourners, and lacked spiritual meaning at the time
of interment. In fact, most of those who entered the
discussion felt that these items represent depredations
on the cemetery that occurred during the period of
its use. Other parties expressed interest in the future
research potential of the materials and in their potential use in interpretive programs, and believed they
should be excluded from reburial for these reasons as
well. It should be pointed out, however, that some in
the descendant community had a differing opinion on
this matter, feeling instead that the presence of these
materials in the sacred ground of the cemetery over
the past 200300years had in fact imbued them with
a spiritual essence by virtue of their close contact
with the remains of the ancestors (Mrs.Ollie McLean,
personal communication 2003).
What does the nonskeletal retained collection currently consist of, how is it organized, and where is
it stored? Table7 summarizes the retained artifact
collections and their disposition as of this writing.
All material is bagged in plastic, labeled according
to catalog number and burial, and boxed according to
burial. The boxes were transferred to the custody of
the Army Corps of Engineers, acting as GSAs technical representative, on February27, 2006. Following
processing at the Corps St. Louis facility, the collection will be returned to New York to be housed at the
Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture.
Table 6. Items Not Recovered after World Trade Center Collapse, September 11, 2001
Category
Material Lost
Comments
Artifacts and samples

Coffin wood
Burials 2650 and 126175; all samples stored in

freezer.
Bags had been inventoried; freezer

samples had been damaged by mold
prior to September 11.
Burials 76125; all items set aside for X-rays.
These items had been inventoried.
Burials 76125; tobacco pipe fragments from all

burials.
Only ceramics had been inventoried.
All burials
Items lost were those set aside during

the selection and packing of reburial
artifacts in July 2001.
Burial 42; Burials 5153 and 5863, except for control-sample heavy and light fractions; Burials 70
126; Burials 172175, except for control-sample
heavy and light fractions; Burial 219; Burials 315
319, except for control-sample heavy and light
fractions.
Samples that had been pulled from

the shelving for any reason and set
aside were not salvaged. Numerous
control samples were off-site at New
South Associates on September 11.
Faunal remains
Burials 125; Burials 76125; Burials 326350.
This includes shell and animal bone.
Floral remains
Inventoried seeds from all burials.
Seeds had been quantified but not

identified.
Grave markers
Cobbles from burials in southwest area of site; headstones from Burials 18, 23, and 47.
Only nine cobbles that had been

boxed along with Burial 13 artifacts
were salvaged.
Site maps on Mylar; in situ and detail bead drawings

for Burial 340.
Photocopies (poor quality) of most of

these were stored off-site. The lost
set had mark-ups for CADD editing.
Photographs
Color slides of artifacts taken in 1998; 35-mm blackand-white negatives of artifacts; black-and-white
large-format negatives of artifacts; one set of in situ
color slides of Burials 157.
Artifact slides were stored at the Office of Pubic Education and Information, which was located in the same
building; materials housed there
were not salvaged.
Inventories
Paper copy of conserved artifact inventory with all

hand-written notes taken during packing of reburial
artifacts, July 2001; manuscript original of coffin
hardware inventory; preliminary flotation sample
inventory.
This artifact inventory was annotated

to indicate which items had been
packed for reburial and sent to Artex.
Four file drawers of reprints for comparative

research.
Material compiled by JMAand

Howard staff.
Coffin hardware
Artifacts from grave
shafts
Artifacts from uncertain
proveniences
Soil samples
Records and documents

Maps
Research files
Key: JMA = John Milner Associates
Table 7. Artifact Categories, Counts, and Current Disposition
Category
Artifacts other than coffins

recovered in direct association with skeletal remains
Approximate
Count
1,628
Notes
Current Status
Includes over 1,200 fragments of

straight pins from shrouds or clothing
as well as buttons, jewelry, beads, and
other items, such as coins and pipes.
Reburied at the site in coffins

with human remains, October
2003.
Coffins
Coffin furniture, nails, and
screws
Coffin wood samples
14,057

2003.
529

2003.
Artifacts recovered from

grave-shaft-fill soil
24,000
This category includes small sherds of

glass, brick, animal bone, shell, and
fragments of iron. Its largest component, however, consists of 18,366
ceramic pieces, mainly waste material
from the potteries that were in operation immediately adjacent to the excavated part of the cemetery.
Transferred to the U.S. Army

Corps of Engineers, February
2006.
Soil samples
1,200
Two or more soil samples were taken

from each burial, usually from the
coffin lid, the interior or stomach area,
and an outside sample for comparison.
Half-liter subsamples of unfloated soil and all light fractions were transferred to the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
February 2006. All remaining
soil has been reburied at the
site.
Chapter 2
Documentary Evidence on the Origin and Use

of the African Burial Ground
Jean Howson, Barbara A. Bianco, and Steven Barto
This chapter presents an overview of the African

Burial Ground from two complementary points of
view. Part one examines documentary evidence about
the origin of the cemetery and the development of its
immediate surrounds. It covers the mid-1600s1795
and includes a chronology of property transactions,
petitions, surveys, ordinances, and key events directly
relevant to the cemeterys use. Maps of New Amsterdam/New York are reproduced in this chapter.
Part two takes a comparative tack. It examines
documentary evidence about African funerals in New
Amsterdam/New York, along with evidence about
burial practices in the black Atlantic world when the
African Burial Ground was in use.
Origin of the African Burial Ground

The African Burial Ground is the only cemetery for
Africans known to have existed in Manhattan until
the eve of the Revolutionary War, yet it left little
impression in public and private documents of the day.
Indeed, it is all but invisible before 1713, when the
first known reference to African burials on public land
appeared in a proposal written by the Anglican chaplain John Sharpe (1881). Africans were first brought to
New Amsterdam/New York in 1625. Where, between
1625 and 1713, did they bury their dead?
There are three places where members of colonial
Manhattans black community would have been laid
to rest during the seventeenth century: in plots set
aside on family or syndicate farms, in the town burial
ground, or in congregational yards. Rural family
cemeteries in upper Manhattan, New Jersey, and Long
Island had burial plots for enslaved Africans in the
eighteenth century, but seventeenth-century examples
of this practice are not known (Kruger 1985:545551).
Governor Peter Stuyvesant, who had the single largest
slaveholding in New Amsterdam, may have permitted

burials in the chapel yard at his bouwerie, the Dutch
word for a plantation or a farm. Stuyvesant erected
the chapel for his neighbors and tenants and paid the
Dutch minister Henricus Selyns 250guilders a year
to conduct Sunday evening services there (Christoph
1984:147148). In use from approximately 1660 to
1687, the chapel was located near what is now the west
side of 2nd Avenue at about 10th Street, within the
yard of St. Marks Church (Stokes 19151928:4:202).
The Dutch West India Company, New Amsterdams
commercial landlord, may have allowed burials near
the camp for Africans who fed the lumber mill on
the Sawkill (Saw River). Situated near present-day
74th Street, the camp was far from the public burial
ground at the islands southern tip, where the town
took shape around a fort built with African labor
(Figures10 and 11).
New Amsterdam/New Yorks public burial ground,
in use from approximately 1649 to 1676, was located
on the west side of present-day Broadway, near present-day Morris Street (New York State Archives,
Albany, New York Colonial Manuscripts, Dutch Patents and Deeds 16301664, Patents Liber 2:20; New
York County, Office of the Register, Deeds Libers,
Libers 12:85, 90 and 13:102). A second public cemetery was opened on the same side of the road, just
north of the town wall (present-day Wall Street). It
began operation after the cemetery established under
the Dutch West India Company ceased to be used.
The second public cemetery, which is still in existence today (Figure12), was integrated into the yard
of Anglican Trinity Church. After opening its doors
in 1697, Trinity Church banned the burial of Africans
in the cemetery outside. The Vestrymen
Ordered, That after the Expiration of four weeks
from the dates hereof no Negroes be buried
36 Jean Howson, Barbara A. Bianco, and Steven Barto
Figure 10. Detail from the Manatus Map, a depiction of New Amsterdam in 1639, with a mark (F) showing
the camp (near present-day 74th Street) where the Dutch West India Company housed African workers. The
unnamed mapmaker provided the earliest known cartographic reference to slavery in New York (Geography &
Map Division, Library of Congress).
Figure 11. The Castello Plan, cartographer Jacques Cortelyous street grid of New Amsterdam in 1660, shows the
common burial ground on the west side of the wagon road (Broadway), midway between the fort and the wall (Wall
Street) (I. N. Phelps Stokes Collection, Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs, The New
York Public Library, Astor, Lenox and Tilden Foundations).
Chapter 2. Documentary Evidence on the Origin and Use of the African Burial Ground 37
Figure 12. View of Trinity Churchyard, October 2005 (photograph by Rob

Tucher).
within the bounds & Limits of the Church Yard

of Trinity Church, that is to say, in the rear of
the present burying place & that no person or
Negro whatsoever, do presume after the terme
above Limited to break up any ground for the
burying of his Negro, as they will answer it at
their perill [Stokes 19151928:4:403, citing the
vestry minutes of October25, 1697].
The ban implies that Africans had been using the
town cemetery during the seventeenth century. If so,
Africans, or the men and women who held Africans
in bondage, would have had to find another burial
site after the cemetery came under Trinitys wing.
Trinity Church did not take over the northern end of
the town burial ground until April 1703. It is possible
that burials of Africans in the north yard continued
until then (Cannan 2004:3).1
Did the Reformed Dutch Church and other congregations open their graveyards for the burial of Africans
prior to, or after, Trinity Church issued its ban? The
officially sponsored Dutch Church had a wide reach in
New Amsterdams multiethnic, multi-religious community. Town residents, including Africans, were married and baptized by its clergymen, and attendance at
its services was open to people of non-Dutch descent
(on African marriages and baptisms, see Goodfriend
[1984, 2003] and Swan [1995]; on the ethnic make-up
of Dutch Church members, see Goodfriend [1992:16]).
Trinity Churchs archivist suggests that there may have been
unrecorded burials of black Anglican communicants during the
eighteenth century (Phyllis Barr, personal communication 1991).
Burial registers are not extant prior to 1777, and churchyard
headstones, which are used to document burials at Trinity, may not
have been provided to blacks.
1
The Dutch Church oversaw the upkeep and use of the

town cemetery. It collected fees for the rental of the
pall, straps, benches, and boards and for tolling the
bell for the dead. At the behest of the church, city
officials reminded the towns two grave diggers to keep
a register of all who die and are buried (Minutes of
the Burgomasters, February25, 1661, in New York
Orphanmasters 1902:2:7778), but these registers,
and any precursors, apparently are not extant. The
proportion of the African population interred in the
town cemeteries during the seventeenth century is
therefore unknown. A new Dutch Church with an
adjoining yard was opened in 1694 on Garden Street.
If the Dutch Church on Garden Street permitted burials
of Africans after the Trinity ban, the practice did not
persist through the following century. An examination
of Dutch Church burial records, extant for 17271804,
yielded only five burials of Africans, and only one,
Susannah Rosedales in 1729, was opt de kirkhoff,
in the churchyard (New York Genealogical and
Biographical Society, Burial Register of the Reformed
Dutch Church in the City of New York, 17271804).
Other congregations held religious services during
the Dutch period, but they utilized private homes or
the church in the fort until they could establish sites of
their own (Rothschild 1990:44). In 1688, the towns
Huguenot community erected a building for the French
Church (glise du Saint Esprit). From 1688 until 1804,
the French Church performed marriages, baptisms,
and funerals, but no burial records of Africans are
listed in its register (French Church du Saint Esprit
1968). Among the smaller congregations, a group that
includes the Lutherans, who erected a church in the
early 1670s; the Quakers, whose first meeting was
recorded in 1681; and the Jews, who had a cemetery by
1683 and a synagogue by 1695 (Goodfriend 1992:84),
few burials of blacks were recorded.2
Burials of unfree Africans in congregational cemeteries would have been at the request of the slaveholder. A rough sense of the congregational affiliations
of slaveholding households at the end of the seventeenth century can be had by linking data on slave2
There were only two burials of Africans recorded at Trinity Lutheran
Church in the eighteenth century: a free African woman named Mareitje
van Guinea, in March 1745, and an illegitimate mulatto child, Abraham
Beeling, in October 1747 (Stryker-Rodda 1974:8485). Moravians
buried just two Africans in their cemetery in the 1770s (New York
Genealogical and Biographical Society, Moravian Church Death
Records, 17521890). German-language records of Christ Lutheran
Church include burials from 17521763 and 17671773, but these have
not been translated. The United Lutheran Church burial records from
17841804 were not examined for the present study. For information
on Protestant church records, see Macy (1994, 1995, 1996).

Table 8. Church Affiliation of a Sample of New York City Slaveholding Households, 1703
Church Affiliation
Number of
Households
Black
Males
Black
Females
Black Male
Children
Black Female
Children
Total
Blacks
Huguenot
11
19
31
Reformed Dutch
17
20
15
44
Anglican
33
27
32
15
81
61
53
66
25
12
156
Note: From U.S. Bureau of the Census (1909) and Rothschild (1990:185204). To obtain church affiliation, households
with blacks in residence identified in the 1703 census were matched with names of church members from Rothschilds list.
Total
holding with tallies of congregational rolls. Working

with figures from the 1703 census, when the black
population numbered 799, historian Joyce Goodfriend
(1992:76) found that Manhattans Dutch households
held 45percent of the towns unfree Africans, the
English held 40percent, the French held 13percent,
and the Jews held 2 percent.3 Based on a sample
of 61slaveholding households for which the actual
church affiliation of the household head can be determined, Anglican parishioners were well represented in
the towns slaveholding ranks. Anglicans held slightly
more than half (81 out of 156) of the Africans in the
sample (Table8). Even if other denominations did
allow burials of Africans, it is likely that the closing
of Trinitys churchyard to blacks would have had a
noticeable impact.
There is no record of the establishment of a cemetery for Africans after the 1697 ban was issued or
after the northern end of the town cemetery was transferred to Trinitys jurisdiction in 1703. It is likely a
cemetery already existed, the one now known as the
African Burial Ground.
The African Burial Ground was located in a lowlying area on the undeveloped reaches of the town.4
The spine of high ground that present-day Broadway
would follow lay to the west. The vlacht, or flat,
of the town Common, where indigents and criminals
would be housed after 1736, was on the south. The

lower end of Kalch (also Collect or Fresh Water)
Pond lay to the east-northeast.
The area was situated between the town and the
outlying parcels the Dutch West India Company conveyed during the 1640s to Africans granted conditional
freedom.5 The parcels formed a loose arc around the
top of Kalch Pond and the Cripplebush (thicketed,
swampy wetlands) that accompanied the ponds western outlet across Manhattan to the North River, one
of the names by which todays Hudson River was
known. Domingo Antonys 12-acre parcel, granted
July13, 1643, anchored the eastern leg of the arc to
the wagon path that would become the Bowery Road.
His land, located below present-day Canal Street,
extended west to the Fresh Water or swamp. The
opposite leg of the arc rested on Simon Congos farm,
granted December16, 1644. Congos 8-acre parcel
was centered on present-day Varick Street. One of
17African land grants located on the northwestern
side of the Cripplebush, his farm angled downward
from present-day West Houston to Charleton Street,
between present-day Avenue of the Americas (Sixth
Avenue) and Hudson Street. The approximate locations of the farms are shown in Figure13 (for descriptions of the parcels and their subsequent conveyances,
see Stokes [19151928:6:7376, 123124]).
Official counts of New Yorks black population are presented in

a discussion of African burial practices in New Amsterdam/New
York.
The present-day state of knowledge about the geographical

coordinates of the African Burial Ground during the seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries is based, in part, on the documentary evidence
presented in this chapter. Only a portion of the cemetery was excavated
in 19911992. The archaeologically excavated portion is discussed
in Chapter3.
4
Eleven African men petitioned the New Netherland Council for

release from servitude to the Dutch West India Company. The petition,
granted February25, 1644 (New Netherland Council 1974:212213),
made freedom of the men and their wives contingent upon the annual
remittance of a tax and assistance, when requested, with public works
projects and civil defense. The Company granted conditional freedom
to some of its other African workers. Several slaveholding individuals
manumitted Africans as well. On the legal rights and privileges
of black New Yorkers under Dutch rule, see Goodfriend (1978),
Higginbotham (1978:105108), Moore (2005), and Swan (1998).
Figure 13. Detail from a map of Dutch-era land grants, superimposed on a Manhattan street grid (ca. 1835), showing the approximate
locations of patents issued to African men and women (the areas inside the heavy black lines), Jan Jansen Damen, and Cornelis Van
Borsum. The map, prepared by R. H. Dodd from translations of the original ground briefs, alludes to the features of the seventeenthcentury landscapethe pond, the swamps and wetlands, the wagon roadsto which these outlying parcels were oriented. The
African farms formed a loose arc around the northern side of Fresh Water Pond and the Cripplebush to the west. The Damen and
Van Borsum lots were situated south of the Cripplebush and west of the pond. The African farms were subsequently reconveyed to
Europeans (from Stokes 19151928:6:Plates 84Ba and 84Bb; on the creation of the map, see Stokes [19151928:2:355357]).

Peter Stuyvesant relocated some of the African
farmers in 16591660, a period of heightened anxiety
about the possibility of attack from Native Americans.
In keeping with a policy to safeguard settlers on
outlying parcels (see Stokes 19151928:4:202203),
Stuyvesant recalled that he had ordered and commanded the Africans to take down their isolated
dwellings for their own improved security... [and]
to establish and erect the same along the common
highway near the honorable generals [Stuyvesants]
farm. At least nine Africans were granted parcels in
true and free ownership aside the common highway
(Bowery Road) that edged Stuyvesants land.6
The Dutch traveler Jasper Danckaerts referred to
the African farms in a journal entry penned October6,
1679. When describing the changing political geography of seventeenth-century Manhattan, Danckaerts
(1913:65) overestimated the liberty Africans had about
where they could live:
We went from the city, following the Broadway, over the valley, or the fresh water.7 Upon
both sides of this way were many habitations of
negroes, mulattoes and whites. These negroes
were formerly the proper slaves of the [West
India] company, but, in consequence of the frequent changes and conquests of the country, they
have obtained their freedom and settled themselves down where they have thought proper,
and thus on this road, where they have ground
enough to live on with their families.
Europeans as well as Africans held land in and
around the African Burial Ground. To understand how
Africans used the landour primary aimrequires
knowing how the activities of other town residents
encroached upon it. Two seventeenth-century land
grants to Dutchmen, Jan Jansen Damen and Cornelis
Van Borsum, are now known to have overlapped
the cemetery. The Van Borsum patent encompassed
the majority of the burial ground, and by the midAmong this group were Christoffel Santome, Solomon Pieters,
Francisco Cartagena, Assento, Willem Antonys, Groote Manuel,
Manuel Sanders, Claes the Negro, and Pieter Tamboer. Stuyvesants
confirmation of the replacement lots, issued April 1665, was translated
by Charles Gehring from the original held at the New York State
Archives, Albany (typescript provided to the authors).
6
The Broadway Danckaerts followed would likely have been

todays Bowery Road. At the time of his journey, the road that became
present-day Broadway had not been laid through the patchwork of
African and European farms situated north of Fresh Water Pond and
the wetlands to the west.
7
eighteenth century, the parcel came to be known as

the Negroes Burial Ground. The cemetery eventually overlapped the south edge of the Damen grant as
well. Van Borsums land would become conflated not
only with the African Burial Ground but also the town
Common, both in the popular imagination and in the
official record of property conveyances and deeds.
Figure13 highlights the geographical relationships
between the African farms and the Damen and Van
Borsum parcels.
Jan Jansen Damen received a patent from the Dutch
West India Company in March 1646. According to the
ground brief, Damen had been in possession of the parcel for about 10years (Stokes 19151928:6:8283).
Called the Kalck (Calk) Hook Farm (for the hilly spit
of land that pushed into the western side of the pond),
the parcel extended westward from the pond to the
approximate alignment of present-day Church Street.
It extended northward from present-day Block154
just south of Duane Street to Canal Street.
Damen died ca.1651. Sometime before 1662
(Stokes 19151928:6:82), the land was ordered to
be partitioned into four quarters, and, in 1671, Jan
Vigne, the son-in-law of Damens wife, came into
possession of the southeastern piece (referred to as
Calk Hook Lot No.2; New York County, Office of the
Register, Liber of Deeds, Liber 25:110). Vignes piece
overlapped the archaeologically excavated portion of
the African Burial Ground (see Chapter3). A nephew,
Gerrit Roos, took control upon Vignes death in 1689,
and when Gerrit died in 1697, his son Peter became
the executor of Vignes property (Wills Liber 56:263
[New York County Surrogates Court 1893:297298]
and Liber 7:465 [New York County Surrogates Court
1893:457]). Wolfort Webber purchased the property
in 1708. By 1725, Anthony Rutgers had acquired it,
along with Calk Hook Lot Nos.1 and 3. The Rutgers
heirs would continue in ownership through the 1790s,
by which time burials were located along the southern portion of the property (for a history of the Rutgers family, see Crosby [1886]). During the Rutgers
tenure, several buildings abutting the burial ground
would be constructed, and Great George Street (later
Broadway) would be extended northward along the
cemeterys western edge.
Cornelis Van Borsum acquired his patent from
Governor Colve in October 1673 (Figure14). The
grant was made in recognition of Van Borsums wife,
Sara Roeloffse or Roeloff (Roeloff was her fathers
given name), who had rendered service as an Indian
interpreter. The parcel was described as
Figure 14. The Van Borsum Patent, issued in October 1673 under Governor Colves signature, describes the boundaries of an
outlying parcel that came to be known as the African Burial Ground. The patent was damaged in a fire at the New York State
Library, Albany, in 1911. (New York State Archives; Series A1881-78, Dutch Colonial Administrative Records, 16731674, Vol. 23,
20433.)

a certain small parcel of land situate on the Island
of Manhattan about north-west from the Windmill, beginning from the north end of the road
which runs toward the Kalckhook, broad in front
on the road or west side, 24rods; in the rear on
the east side, the like 24rods; long on each side
as well along the Kalckhook as on the south side,
44rods each [Stokes 19151928:6:123].
Based on the description, the parcel covered approximately 6.6acres. Using as a guide the street grid shown
in Figure13, the area extended eastward from Broadway to approximately Centre Street. The northern
boundary was just south of Duane Street. The southern
boundary ran, roughly, along Chambers Street.
Sara Roeloff had seven living children, including
grown sons and daughters, by her first husband, surgeon Hans Kiersted. She would have an eighth child
with Van Borsum, and after his death in 1682 would
remarry once again, to Elbert Stouthoff (for biographical information on Roeloff, see Janowitz [2005]; Totten [1925:210212]). Roeloff had a prenuptial contract
with her third husband that enabled her to retain
ownership of her property (Narrett 1992:7779). On
her death in 1693, she left her estate to her children
and named as executors her son Lucas Kiersted and
sons-in-law Johannis Kip and William Teller (Wills
Liber 56:16 [New York County Surrogates Court
1893:225227]). In 1696, Governor Fletcher would
grant a confirmation deed for the land to these three
as trustees of the estate (New York State Archives,
Albany, Letters Patent, Patents Liber 7:11). Johannis Kips eldest son Jacobus would petition the city
in 1723 to have the land surveyed, but there is no
clear evidence of any development taking place on it
around that time. A piece of the land near the southeast
corner was leased for a stoneware pottery sometime
around 1730. From 1745 to approximately 1760, a
palisade cut across the bottom of the patent, eliding
the southern portion with the town Common behind
the wall. By 1765, five houses had been built along
the east side of Broadway, within the patent, and were
being occupied or leased out by the heirs.
Why and when members of colonial Manhattans
African community began interring their relatives
and friends on the undeveloped edge of the town is
not known. Our conjecture is that free and enslaved
Africans might have begun appropriating Common
land for use as a burial ground during the 1640s,
when the first African farms were established, or
perhaps during the 1660s, when some of the AfriThe New York African Burial Ground
can lot holders were moved to the road alongside

Stuyvesants bowery. The first interments might have
been limited to the core African farm families, but
a more inclusive cemetery might have developed as
members of the towns steadily expanding African
population sought a burial place under the control
of their own community. It is reasonable to assume
that the families who were the farms proprietors
were influential in overseeing the burial ground. As
African farms passed into European hands, and New
Amsterdam was renamed New York, use of the burial
ground would have continued.8
Although the area would be granted to Europeans
by the third quarter of the seventeenth century, we
hypothesize that its Dutch deed holders and the English colonial government would have abided African
burials on land that was inconvenient for residential
development and undesirable for agricultural use.
Approval in practice, if not in law, of an existing
African cemetery would have solved the problem
posed by the Trinity Church ban. It also would have
been consistent with the racial segregation upon which
slavery in Britains mainland American colonies came
to depend.
In summary, there is no known date for the origin
of the New York African Burial Ground and no evidence that explains how its location was chosen. We
know that it was in existence by 1713 and believe that
a need for it must have arisen by 1703 at the latest.
We also know that the land that would become the
New York African Burial Ground was in close proximity to some of the farms granted to Africans during
the mid-1600s. Spatial proximity alone, however,
cannot be taken as proof that the burial ground was
established during the time that Africans held these
lots. Much of the land was granted to Sara Roeloffs
husband in 1673, but neither the ground brief nor the
1696 deed of confirmation mentions the cemetery.
None of Roeloffs heirs questioned the presence on
their property of an African cemetery, although they
knew of its existencelegal documents of the day
identify the heirs as claimants and proprietors of the
Negroes Burying Ground. Despite the language
of the law, the cemetery was a place where Africans
held sway.
Africans held the rights and interests in their farms for varied spans
of time, as Stokes (19151928:6:7376, 123124) biographies of
the parcels attest. Domingo Antonys farm was conveyed in August
1668 to Augustine Hermans. The duration of Simon Congos tenure
is unclear.
8
Documentary Chronology of the

African Burial Ground, 16501783
Subsequent to its archaeological excavation in 1991
1992, the African Burial Grounds history has been
recounted often, in all manner of media.9 That history,
however, has been reconstructed through a very limited set of public and private documents, and, often,
inferences based on scant evidence have been made.
To clarify the sources of information that anchor the
archaeological analysis presented in this report, a
two-part chronology of documented events, laws,
and transactions that affected the use of the cemetery
is provided.
ca. 1650: This is the hypothetical date for the origin
of the African Burial Ground. Land grants to Africans
began in the 1640s. The Damen patent, which skirted
the northern edge of the burial ground, was issued
in 1646.
1673: The Van Borsum Patent, which covered much
of the area of the African Burial Ground, was issued
under the signature of Governor Colve.
16971703: Anglican Trinity Church assumed
management of the town cemetery and banned burials
of Africans in it.
1704: French Huguenot Elias Neau, with financial
support from the Anglican Society for the Propagation
of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, organized a school for
enslaved Africans (Butler 1983:166169). Enslaved
and free black New Yorkers put literacy to a variety
of uses, including petitioning the municipal government for assistance in protecting African graves, and
acquiring land for a new cemetery (see entries for
1788 and 1795).
17121713: According to a letter from Governor
Hunter to the Lords of Trade, dated June23, 1712,
in April of 1712, an armed insurrection of enslaved
Africans resulted in 6suicides and 21executions
(Brodhead 18531887:5:341342; see also Scott
1961). The Common might have been used for the
executions, and the dead might have been buried in
the African Burial Ground. In the following March,
John Sharpe of the Anglican Society for the PropaThe Office of Public Education and Interpretation for the project
retains huge files of articles, books, and the many films and videos
that have told the story of the cemetery and its rediscovery. Official
documents, such as the National Historic Landmark nomination
(Howson and Harris 1992, reproduced in AppendixA, Part3 of this
volume) and the Designation Report for New York Citys landmark
historic district, provide synopses of the documentary research.
9
gation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts mentioned

African burials in his Proposals for Erecting a
School, Library and Chapel at New York. Sharpe
(1881:355) noted that Africans were buried in the
Common by those of their country and complexion
without the office [of a Christian minister], on the
contrary the Heathenish rites are performed at the
grave by their countrymen. He was almost certainly
referring to funerals in the African Burial Ground,
although the exact portion of the ground then in use
cannot be determined. The Common covered the
area of present-day City Hall Park to Fresh Water
Pond.
1722: The Common Council passed a law regulating the burial of all Negroes and Indian Slaves
that shall dye within this corporation [located] on
the south side of the Fresh Water (New York City
Common Council 1905:3:296).10 The law stipulated
that the enslaved had to be buried by Day-light,
on penalty of 10shillings, payable by the slaveholder.
1723: The Common Council appointed a committee to assist Alderman Jacobus Kip (the son of Johannis Kip and grandson of Sara Roeloff) in surveying
the Van Borsum patent (New York City Common
Council 1905:3:335). Care was to be taken by the
committee to preserve the width of Broadway as it
was extended northward, through the patent. Kips
need for a survey may have been related to Anthony
Rutgerss purchase of Lot No.2 of Calk Hook Farm.
That lot abutted the Van Borsum patent on the north,
with the boundary running diagonally across presentHere and in other restrictive legislation, both Negroes and Indians
Slaves are referred to. There is no reason to suppose that enslaved
Native Americans would not have used the same burial ground as
Africans, yet no distinctive forms of burial attributable to Native
Americans were identified during the archaeological excavation in
19911992. Although burial practices of Native Americans during the
contact period are not well known, evidence indicates that Munseespeaking Lenape Delaware buried their dead in immediate proximity to
their settlements and exhumed and reburied the bones of their kin when
settlements were moved (Cantwell and Wall 2001:97103). Apparently,
the typical burial position for these groups, and for Iroquois, was flexed.
By the time the African Burial Ground was in use, head-to-west burial
with an extended supine position was practiced (Kerry Nelson, e-mail
to Historical Archaeology mailing list at Arizona State University,
August1, 2000; Wray and Schoff 1953:5759). The African Burial
Ground Skeletal Biology Team compared the skeletal sample with
Native American DNA, dental morphology, and craniometrics, but none
of these statistical analyses pointed to Native American ancestry. If
native individuals were buried in the excavated portion of the cemetery,
there was insufficient evidence to identify them by their biological
characteristics. The biological evidence generally pointed to African
origins if any origin was estimable.
10

day Block154.11 Perhaps there was some question
about the exact location of the boundary between
the two patents. It is more likely, however, that the
extension of Broadway northward to Rutgerss land
required an exact survey.
1730: Two plans of the town ca.1730, each based on
a survey conducted by James Lyne, show little development in the area near the burial ground. The 1731
Lyne-Bradford Plan (Figure15) labeled the Common,
the ropewalk along the west side of Broadway (Great
George Street), and the powder magazine on a small
rise between the main Fresh Water Pond and a smaller
pond or swamp to its south (the Little Collect). Also
depicted, but not labeled, were two buildings, one on
the east side of Broadway, south of the burial ground,
and one on the northern part of the Common. The latter
building was identified as a pottery on the Carwitham
Plan, printed in 1740 (Figure16). The parcel of land
containing the pottery was apparently in the possession
of Abraham Van Vleck (Sara Roeloffs granddaughter
Maria had married Van Vleck in 1710). Van Vleck
probably leased it to William Crolius, listed in the city
as a freeman potter in 1728. This area (on the south
side of present-day Reade Street to the east of Elk,
Block153) was probably not used for burials after this
date, if it had been previously.12 The pottery may have
begun disposing of kiln waste within the excavated
portion of the African Burial Ground around this time
(see Chapter4). Only the pottery operationand its
waste disposal practiceswould have constituted a
clear encroachment.
1731: A smallpox epidemic in the city claimed
the lives of approximately 50African New Yorkers,
and 79Africans were listed in the bills of mortality
published in the New-York Gazette in August through
December. The Gazette sorted whites by congregational affiliation and noted that eight of the towns
congregations had cemeteries (New-York Gazette,
November15, 1731). Blacks were listed separately
and, presumably, were interred in the African Burial
Ground. In mid-November, when the municipal codes
were renewed, the Common Council placed two more
restrictions on burials of enslaved Africans (see entry
for 1722). To ensure that African funerals were not
a pretext for insurrection, the master of the deceased
slave was made responsible for vetting the attendees
Rutgers acquired one of the Calk Hook lots in 1723 and two more
in 1725. The latter two were probably Lot Nos.1 and 3 (Crosby
1886:84; Stokes 19151928:6:82).
and limiting their number to 12, excluding the grave

digger and the Bearers who Carry the Corps. Pawls
and pawl bearers were also banned (New York City
Common Council 1905:4:8889). A pawl, or pall,
was a large, typically sumptuous cloth spread over
the coffin (or the corpse) during the funeral procession. Pallbearers held up the hem. Given that palls
were usually rented from churches, prohibiting palls
at black funerals turned a sign of Christian burial into
a prerogative of whites.
17321735: The first cartographic reference to a
Negro Burying Place appeared on a hand-drawn
plan of the city, ca.17321735. Mrs. Buchnerds Plan
(Figure17) situates the burial ground on the southwest
side of the swamp below the Fresh Water pond. It is
likely this is the same part of the Common referred to
by John Sharpe when he mentioned burials conducted
by Africans.
1736: The city erected an Almshouse on the Common, at the approximate location of present-day City
Hall. This was the beginning of the transformation
of the Common into a site for public institutions
(Epperson 1999; Hall 1910; Harris etal. 1993; Hunter
Research 1994).
1741: A great conspiracy of Africans was thwarted
and its perpetrators brought to trial (Lieutenant Governor Clarke to Duke of Newcastle, and to the Lords of
Trade, June29, 1741, in Brodhead [18531887:6:195
198]; see also Horsmanden [1971]). Thirty of the
convicted Africans were executed on the Common (13
by burning at the stake and 17 by hanging), as were
4 of the Europeans. The executions were memorialized on the Grim Plan, a depiction of New York in
17421744 set down in 1813 (Figure18). The Africans
might well have been interred at the African Burial
Ground, if interment was allowed.
1745: The town erected a cedar-log palisade wall,
and part of the Van Borsum patent (along the south
side) was within it, part without. After this time, it is
presumed that the African Burial Ground would have
been restricted to the area outside (i.e.,to the north
of) the wall. When the palisade was dismantled is
unclear, but city plans from ca.1760 onward do not
show it. During the time that the wall stood, access to
the burial ground from the town would have entailed
passing through one of the palisade gates.13
11
The location of the kiln was traced back from later property
records and maps.
12
David Grim, in notes jotted in November 1819 on the back of the

plan he drew (see Figure18), identified the logs as cedar and put
their length at 14feet. He situated one of the palisades four gates at
present-day Broadway near Chambers Street (Hall 1910:389; Stokes
19151928:4:591).
13
Figure 15. The Lyne-Bradford Plan, printed by William Bradford in 1731 from a survey made by James Lyne, depicts New York in 1730.
The African Burial Ground is not identified on the map, which Bradford marketed at 4s. 6d. The cemeterys immediate surrounds show
little development. The structure encircled on
the detail at the right was the Crolius Pottery.
The large structure on the Common adjacent
to the ropewalk has not been identified. The
dashed line parallel to the ropewalk is a ward
boundary (Rare Books Division, The New
York Public Library, Astor, Lenox and Tilden
Foundations).
Figure 16. The Carwitham Plan, named for its engraver John Carwitham, was based on James Lynes survey. Printed in
London in 1740, the Carwitham Plan provides more details than the Lyne-Bradford Plan. The arrow on the upper left points
to the Crolius Pottery, located just south of the ponds, in what was probably the southeastern part of the African Burial
Ground (Viscount Coke and the Trustees of the Holkham Estate).
Figure 17. Mrs. Buchnerds hand-drawn Plan of the City of New York in the Year 1735. The words Negro Burying Place are legible on the
central fold of the manuscript, adjacent to the swamp on the south side of the Collect (near the top of the full sheet shown above, and
circled at right). This was the first time the cemetery was labeled on a
map (I. N. Phelps Stokes Collection, Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division
of Art, Prints and Photographs, The New York Public Library, Astor, Lenox
and Tilden Foundations).

1753: In August, John Teller, Jacobus Stoutenburgh, and Maria Van Vleck petitioned the Common
Council for Some lands belonging to this Corporation
in Exchange for the Negroe burying place, as also for
a small Slip of Land on which a Pott house &c are
built (New York City Common Council 1905:5:416).
The land offered to the city was probably the portion
of the patent that fell within the palisade wall, making
it ripe for corporation encroachment or even confiscation.14 If the wording of the request is taken to mean
that part of the land Teller and company tried to swap
had been used for burials, then the total area of the
cemetery contracted following the walls construction.
The Common Council deferred consideration of the
petition, and no further mention of it was made in the
minutes until 1760.
17541755: The Negros Burial Ground was
labeled clearly on the Maerschalk Plan surveyed in
1754 and published in 1755 (Figure19). Also shown
on the map are the town palisade wall, potteries at
the presumed northeast and southeast corners of the
burial ground, a structure on Broadway, and a dashed
line running southwest to northeast from that structure
toward the northern pottery. This line may represent
a fence along the southern boundary of the Calk
Hook Farm, possibly marking the northern limit of
the burial ground (see Chapter4). The structure on
Broadway may have been a gatehouse to the Rutgers
estate located to the north, or a house that Anthony
Rutgers was leasing out.
1757: A small burial ground (the length of two
Boards) was laid out on the Common, on the east
side of the Almshouse, for the abject poor who resided
within (New York City Common Council 1905:6:85).
The Almshouse cemetery was situated south of the
southern boundary of the Van Borsum patent, but
because the southern extent of the early African Burial
Ground is not known, there is a possible overlap
between the two cemeteries. Also in this year, a jail
was built east of the Almshouse, and a barracks went
up along the south side of present-day Chambers Street
east of Broadway (Hall 1910; Hunter Research 1994).
The construction in this area may have disturbed
African Burial Ground graves.
1760: The Common Council and the children of

Maria Van Vleck came to an agreement regarding
three Lotts of Ground Contiguous and adjoining to
the Negroes Burying place on part of Which said Lotts,
their Father [Abraham Van Vleck] Built a Potting
House pot oven and Sunk a Well Supposing at that
Time the said Lands were his property (New York
City Common Council 1905:6:238). It is likely this
parcel was separated from the majority of the Van Borsum patent by the palisade wall built in 1745, which
may account for the citys unexplained possession,
although there may be a missing transaction. Under the
agreement, the city leased the land (a 100-by-100-foot
plot) to Van Vlecks daughters for a period of 19years.
Thus, land that originally may have been within the
African Burial Ground was taken over for a pottery
factory, came to be considered city property, and was
reconveyed by lease to the Van Borsum heirs.
ca. 1765: Isaac Teller (one of the claimants to the
land) built three houses along Broadway within the
Van Borsum patent, near present-day Chambers Street.
At the time, there apparently were two other houses on
Broadway to the north of Tellers buildings.15 All of the
buildings may have encroached on the African Burial
Ground. Although the burial grounds original western
limit is not known, there is no reason to think it did
not extend to Broadway. Teller built a fence around
an unspecified portion of the African Burial Ground
and charged a fee for entering its gate (see Chapter4).
By the 1760s, it is likely no burials occurred within
100feet of Broadway, the depth of a typical lot.
1767: The Ratzer Map of this year (Figure20) did
not identify the African Burial Ground. It depicted the
houses along Broadway that would have occupied the
burial grounds western edge, as well as a diagonal
line that may have marked the northern boundary
and may represent a fence. Three structures, all of
unknown function but possibly associated with the
potteries, stood along the north side of this line, two
near Broadway and one near the swamp south of
Fresh Water Pond. The barracks was located south
of present-day Chambers Street. Numerous buildings
occupied the eastern/southeastern perimeter of the
We postulate that the portion of the patent on the south side of the
palisade was in the de facto possession of the city, though not, as it
would turn out, in its legal possession. The map evidence indicates
that the first pottery works (ca.1730) stood outside the palisades
line-of-march. Another building, presumed to be part of the works,
was located inside the wall on the city plan surveyed in 1754 (see
Figure19). It is possible that Van Vleck had the latter built for the
Crolius pottery works in the 1740s or early 1750s.
15
14
According to testimony entered before the New York State Supreme

Court of Judicature in 1812 (Smith v. Burtis) and 1813 (Smith v.
Lorillard), Teller had one brick and two wood houses put up between
1760 and 1765. Two more houses were said to have fronted Broadway
to the immediate north of Tellers buildings: the Ackerman house
(next door to Teller) and the Kip house (next door to Ackerman, near
present-day Broadway and Reade Street). For the case testimonies,
see Johnson (18531859:9:174185, 10:338357).
Figure 18. Detail from New Yorker David Grims

recollection of the city in 17421744, showing two of
the punishments meted out to Africans convicted of
conspiring to set fire to the town. The stake at which
some of the conspirators were burned (No. 55) is set
across from a tannery (No. 40). A box representing the
powder house (No. 27) is near the scaffold where the
gibbeting took place (No. 56). Northwest of the scaffold
are the Remmey & Crolius Pottery (No. 44) and the neatly
laid gardens of the Rutgers estate (No. 45). Grim labeled
the small building to the southwest of the scaffold (No.
43, abutting the palisade) as the Corselius Pottery (The
Lionel Pincus and Princess Firyal Map Division, The New
York Public Library, Astor, Lenox and Tilden Foundations).
Figure 19. Detail from the Maerschalk Plan, surveyed by Francis Maerschalk in 1754 and published by Gerardus Duyckink in 1755. The Negros Buriel Ground is clearly labeled to the
southwest of Fresh Water Pond and north of the Common and the palisade wall. The dashed diagonal line corresponds to the approximate northern boundary of the Van Borsum patent, and
probably also of the African Burial Ground, and may represent a fence. The Common is todays City Hall Park, with Broadway running along its west side. By this date, houses had gone up
along the west side of Broadway as far north as the Palisade. The almshouse (No. 28) and a powder house (No. 29) stood on the Common. The unidentified building that hugs the south side
of the palisade is presumed to be a part of the pottery works on the opposite side of the fence (Geography & Map Division, Library of Congress).
Figure 20. Detail from the Ratzer Map, 1767, surveyed by Bernard Ratzer. The general location of the African Burial Ground is circled. The hachures indicating relief suggest the
contours of the hillside sloping down from south to north through the area. Note structures on Broadway properties on the west side of the burial ground, the pottery buildings
on the southeast, the barracks (No. 26) to the south, the almshouse and gaol (No. 24 and No. 23) below the barracks, and the diagonal line that may have marked the northern
boundary of the Van Borsum patent (Geography & Map Division, Library of Congress).

African Burial Ground. The physical area available
for interments was becoming increasingly constrained
by this time.
1773: Trinity Church established its own small
Burial ground for the Negros on a lot bounded by
present-day Church Street, Reade Street, and West
Broadway (Trinity Church Archives, Minutes of
the Vestry, September15, 1773; New York Public
Library, Special Collections, Gerard Bancker Plans
17701848, Box3, Folder 81). Records of burials
in this cemetery, located a block to the west of the
African Burial Ground, are apparently not extant.
The cemetery was in use through mid-August 1795,
after which Trinitys vestrymen arranged to have it
surveyed into lots. Within 2years, the lots had been
leased out (Cannan 2004:4).
1775: The Bridewell, an institution for the incarceration of debtors and vagabonds, was built west of
the Almshouse, near the present-day southeast corner
of Chambers Street and Broadway. Again, this construction may have disturbed graves belonging to the
early African Burial Ground.
17761783: British forces took New York and
occupied the city for the duration of the war. They
pulled down the houses Teller had built ca.1765, along
with the fence (Johnson 18531859:10:335). They
also buried deserters and prisoners of war behind the
barracks on the Common (New York Public Library,
Special Collections, British Headquarters Papers
17751783, Provost Weekly Returns, 17821783;
Stokes 19151928:3:927). These burials probably
were limited to the southern portion of the African
Burial Ground (Figure21) within present-day Chambers Street and between Chambers and Reade Streets.
Some of them may have been shallow, with bodies
thrown into the ground in a heap (Sabine 1954:149).
No mass graves were found in the archaeologically
excavated portion of the African Burial Ground. During the war, the citys population swelled with Africans
in search of freedom. It is assumed that those who died
while in the city would have been buried in the African Burial Ground (see Chapter9). When the British
evacuated, thousands of blacks accompanied them.
can Burial Ground. Within a very short period, from

the mid-1780s to the mid-1790s, the African Burial
Ground would be ever more constricted, so that,
finally, burials could no longer take place there. Free
and enslaved African Americans kept a close eye on
the burial ground and responded rapidly to its declining fortunes by mobilizing their own and the citys
resources.
1784: In response to a petition from Henry Kip
and the other Van Borsum patent holders, the Common Council appointed a committee in September to
lay out and regulate streets through the parcel (New
York City Common Council 1917:1:81). Clearly, Sara
Roeloffs heirs were making plans to develop their
property. The committee dragged its heels, and Kip
petitioned it again, in mid-November 1787 (New York
City Common Council 1917:1:338).
1787: With the survey into lots of the Calk Hook
Farm (Figure22), parts of the northernmost area of the
African Burial Ground may have ceased to be used.
Houses were not built on these lots immediately, but
it is possible that a fence, or perhaps survey posts
marking the outlines of the lots, discouraged burial
in this area (see Chapters3 and 4).
1788: Public exposure of the unsavory world
of nocturnal grave robbing at cemeteries used by
blacks and the poor created an uproar that spilled
from the February pages of the popular press to the
April city streets, where citizens mobbed doctors
accused of desecrating the dead. Free and enslaved
blacks had petitioned the Common Council in 1787
to stop physicians from carrying African corpses
to the dissecting table at the municipal hospital,
located on the west side of present-day Broadway
near Duane Street (Municipal Archives of the City
of New York, Papers of the Common Council, Petitions, Free Negroes and Slaves of the City of New
York, February14, 1787).16 A free man of color
detailed the horrid practice in a letter printed in
the Daily Advertiser. Another letter disclosed that
a private cemetery on Gold Street, made available
The men wrote on behalf of a burial ground assigned for the

Use of your Petitioners, a description that may best fit the Trinity
Church African cemetery at the corner of Church and Reade Streets
(see discussion in the entry for 1773). Bodies were also disinterred
from the African Burial Ground and the Almshouse cemetery on
the Common, as letters published in the Daily Advertiser during
February and recollections of the citys cadaver-seeking medical
men make clear (see Heaton 1943; Humphrey 1973; Ladenheim
1950).
16
Closing of the African Burial

Ground, 17841795
The return of peace and the boom in development
following the war spelled the demise of the Afri-
Figure 21. Detail from the British Headquarters Map, 1782, that depicts the area behind the barracks used for interments by the
occupying British forces during the Revolution. This area (just inside the circle used to identify the general location of the African
Burial Ground) is stippled with crosses, a convention the mapmaker used to represent congregational as well as common burial
grounds. St. Pauls churchyard, in the lower left corner, is also stippled with crosses (The Lionel Pincus and Princess Firyal Map
Division, The New York Public Library, Astor, Lenox and Tilden Foundations).
for African interments by Mr.Scipio Gray, had been

looted, too. Gray had been forced to remain inside
his home while physicians ransacked the grave of
a child in the nearby ground (Daily Advertiser,
February16 and 28, 1788). The cemetery may have
belonged to Anglican St. Georges Chapel, identified
on a 1789 plan that depicts New York on the eve of
the development boom (Figure23).
1794: On October27, the Common Council read
a Petition from sundry black men in this City praying the Aid of this Board in purchasing a Piece of
Ground for the interment of their dead (New York
City Common Council 1917:2:112).17 The petition

was referred to a committee, which reported back
the following year.
1795: The survey and division into lots of the Van
Borsum patent made inevitable the complete closing
The words of the petition were not read into the minutes, and the
petition itself is apparently not extanta search of the Common
Council Papers held at the Municipal Archives of the City of New York
came up empty-handed. Though it is not possible to find out whether
the petition carried any signatures, it is likely that some of its writers
were the founding members of the African Society, which petitioned
the Common Council 8 months later regarding the management of
the African cemetery at Chrystie Street.
17
Figure 22. Detail from a 1787 surveyors map showing the partition of the Calk Hook
Farm into lots. The lots on the southern side of Anthony Street (present-day Duane),
shown abutting the Negroes Burying Ground, actually overlapped the cemeterys
northern edge. Broadway crosses at the top of the map detail. Ann (present-day Elk)
Street crosses at the bottom. Lot dimensions are shown in feet (courtesy of the Division
of Land Records [Liber 46:140]).
Figure 23. Detail from the Directory Plan of 1789, drawn by surveyor John McComb, Jr., for the annual directory of city residents
published during New Yorks brief stint as the federal capital. The plan depicts the city on the eve of the development boom that
led to the closing of the African Burial Ground (the cemeterys general location is circled). The Gold Street cemetery Mr. Scipio Gray
made available for African burials was near Anglican St. Georges Chapel (No. 8), located several blocks southeast of the African
Burial Ground (Geography & Map Division, Library of Congress).
of the African Burial Ground (Figure24). Property

disputes amongst the heirs notwithstanding, lots were
rapidly sold off and development would begin soon
after the partition. Haggling between the heirs and the
city over the transfer of rights and titles to the strip on
which Chambers Street east of Broadway would be
laid was resolved in June of the following year (New

York City Common Council 1917:2:252253).
Meanwhile, the Common Council committee
charged with locating land for a new African cemetery
reported on April7 that a proper spot had been found
on Chrystie Street in the Seventh Ward, on a parcel
Figure 24. Detail from a 1795 surveyors map showing the locations of the lots assigned to Sara Roeloffs heirs. For example, D
stood for lots that would have fallen to the Tellers (descended from Rachel Kiersted), F for those of the Van Vlecks (descended from
Catherine Kiersted), and B for Daniel Denniston (whose wife descended from Lucas Kiersted). The alley laid out from Reed Street to
Ann (later Elm/Elk) Street would be shifted slightly and come to be called Republican Alley (courtesy of the Division of Land Records
[Liber 195:405, Filed Map 76J]).
Figure 25. Detail of a petition submitted in June 1795 to the municipal government from the African Society, requesting that six of
its members be granted legal standing to manage a cemetery established on Chrystie Street for black New Yorkers. The names of the
proposed managers are marked with a check (courtesy New York City Municipal Archives; Papers of the Common Council, Petitions
[Isaac Fortune, June 19, 1795]).
that had been part of the Delancey estate. The committee recommended that the city contribute 100
toward the purchase of the parcel, described as four
contiguous lots, at 100 by 25feet per lot, available for
450. The committee also recommended that the deed
to the ground be held by the city in trust for its users
(New York City Common Council 1917:2:137). On
June22, the Common Council read into the minutes a
petition from Isaac Fortune and other free men of color
who requested legal standing to manage the affairs of
the Chrystie Street cemetery (Figure25). Fortune and

his fellow petitioners informed the Common Council
that they had organized a mutual aid association called
the African Society but had been unable, under state
law, to incorporate as a religious organization. The
petitioners described their involvement in arranging
for the purchase of the Chrystie Street parcel from
Samuel Delaplaine, declared their intention to make
improvements on it, and asked for the right to collect
the burial fees and exercise the privileges held by

managers of other burial yards. The Common Council
granted the request (New York City Common Council
1917:2:158159).18
It is not known how long African American New
Yorkers maintained their connection to the African
Burial Ground. Once private houses and businesses
began to be built and landfill covered the ground surface, surely the community was severely constrained
from even visiting graves. Yet during the opening
decades of the nineteenth century, free blacks came to
reside in the relatively inexpensive housing along the
streets that had been laid through the cemetery and its
immediate surrounds (Figure26). The concentration
of black households within the area was evident by
1810, as historian Shane White (1991:171179) has
shown (see Chapter9). The neighborhood was also
home to the early independent black churches, where
many African American New Yorkers invested their
spiritual energies and organizational acumen after the
African Burial Ground had closed. The land where
the African Burial Ground sat would see several more
phases of development over the next 200years. With
the exception of property deeds and surveyors plans,
traces of the cemetery would become increasingly
scarce. When the cemetery was unearthed in 1991
1992, most New Yorkers were wholly surprised. The
African Burial Grounds period of use, which might
have lasted a century and a half, had to be examined
anew, as did the lives and labors of the New Yorkers
who reposed there.
African Funeral Practices in

New Amsterdam/New York
The spatial relationship between the African Burial
Ground and the city changed radically during the
eighteenth century. As New Yorks population rose
and its economy expanded, the built environment
advanced northward, bringing private homes, factories, municipal institutions, and pleasure gardens
to the cemeterys surrounds. The interplay between
urban development and population growth would
leave a mark in the archaeologically excavated portion
of the African Burial Ground, particularly in regard
to the distribution of graves. The concerns of those
who looked to the cemetery as a place of repose for
their relatives and friends would also leave a mark in

the excavated burial ground.19 But black New Yorkers efforts to care for their dead did not enter the
documentary record until late in the day, as seen in
the chronology of events that affected the cemeterys
use. And although documentation about the African
Burial Ground is rather thin, it is considerably more
substantial than the paper trail on funeral practices
in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century black New
York.
No eyewitness accounts of how Africans buried
their dead in New Amsterdam/New York have come
down to us. No domestic ledgers or personal diaries
have come to light that tell us whether household
heads customarily footed the funeral bills of the Africans who resided in Manhattan homes. A handful of
records touch on burial logistics and labor, but these
records date to the first half of the eighteenth century.
Among them, as noted, are the Reverend Sharpes
1713 remark about Africans conducting Heathenish
graveside rites and city ordinances from 1722 and
1731 that restricted the hour and size of African funerals and banned the use of palls. Cabinetmaker Joshua
Delaplaines daybook rounds out the list. The daybook
has entries for 13slaveholders who purchased coffins
for African men, women, and children between 1753
and 1756 (see Chapter10).
These writers were sparing with narrative detail.
John Sharpe, for example, omitted the sights and
sounds of the graveside rites. He did not mention
how long the rites lasted or note whether they varied
in relation to a persons age, sex, or manner of death.
Nor did he reflect on how the rites orchestrated the
expression of private grief, strengthened or attenuated attachments between the living and the dead, or
transformed the once-living person into constituent
qualities, forces, or parts. Sharpe lived in a Manhattan made nervous by the anticipation of conspiracies
and revolts. So, too, did the city officials who envisioned a world in which the funerals of unfree Africans
would be small in size, short on pomp, and finished by
sundown. Whether large processions, cloth-covered
corpses, and nighttime burials had been the norm when
the restrictions were enacted is unclear. Delaplaines
daybook provides a glimpse of the monetary side of
mid-eighteenth-century funerals, but it does not reveal
Chapter 5 provides an overview of the mortuary program
that entered the African Burial Grounds archaeological record.
Chapters69 track the interplay between the mortuary program, the
built environment, and the African population through the eighteenth
century.
19
Two months later, the process of closing down the Trinity Church
African cemetery got underway when the Vestrymen made plans to
survey and divide the ground into lots (see discussion in the entry
for 1773).
18
Figure 26. Detail from the Taylor-Roberts Plan, 1797, drawn by city surveyor Benjamin Taylor and engraved by John Roberts, showing the
newly laid street grid that crossed the African Burial Ground at the end of the eighteenth century (The Lionel Pincus and Princess Firyal Map
whether colonial Manhattans slaveholders typically

paid for coffins for the African dead.
Although the experience of death and the organization of interment cannot be teased from the documentary record, population histories assembled by the New
York African Burial Ground History Team indicate
that funeral practices in black New Amsterdam/New

York were part of an Atlantic world of enormous complexity and scope. To help clarify the material signatures left by those who interred the individuals in the
archaeologically excavated portion of the cemetery,
we draw on two core aspects of the History Teams

work. One aspect concerns documentary evidence
on the origins of the citys African community. The
other aspect concerns documentary evidence about
the care of the dead in central and western Africa and
the Caribbean, the primary regions that furnished the
workers on whom white New Yorkers relied.
Population
Black New Yorkers formed a critical mass during the
colonial era and in the decades immediately following
the Revolutionary War. The numbers in Table9 make
it clear that this was a community sizable enough to fill
a cemetery. Blacks constituted over 14percent of the
citys population at the end of the seventeenth century,
fully 20.9percent in 1746, and a low of 7.9percent
just after the Revolution.
Table 9. Black Population of New York
County, 16981800
Year
Population
1698
700
1703
799
1712
975
1723
1,362
1731
1,577
1737
1,719
1746
2,444
1749
2,368
1756
2,278
1771
3,137
1786
2,107
1790
3,092
1800
5,867
Note: From Foote (1991:78) and White

(1991:26), except 1703, which is from the
U.S. Bureau of the Census (1909). The count
of black male city residents was recorded incorrectly in a version of the 1703 census (see
tables reproduced in Green and Harrington
[1932: 95]), and the miscountresulting in a
figure of only 630 total blacks for that year
has often made its way into the literature.
What proportion of the citys black population

was enslaved during the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries and what proportion was free? is a quesThe New York African Burial Ground
tion that has been asked often. Free blacks were not
counted separately from the enslaved until the first federal census of 1790. White (1991:153) has suggested
that there were probably never more than 100free
blacks in New York City during the colonial period.
Historian Christopher Moore (personal communication 2003) has suggested that following the restrictive
British colonial legislation of the early eighteenth
century, most, if not all, of those in families that had
been free or semi-free under the Dutch simply left
New York. The count for 1790, which reflects post
Revolutionary War demographic changes, includes
1,036free and 2,056enslaved blacks. The count for
1800 includes 3,333free and 2,534enslaved blacks
(see Table9).
Manhattans black workforce was always ethnically diverse, but the pools that supplied it shifted
during the course of the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries. Members of New Amsterdams black community were taken from captured Portuguese and
Spanish privateers bound for the Caribbean and from
Dutch ships that plied the lanes linking New Netherland to Brazil and West Central Africa (Heywood and
Thornton 2009a:912; Medford, Brown, Heywood,
etal. 2009a:67). After the onset of British rule in
1664, the routing of people from West Central Africa
to New York via the Caribbean continued. Direct
importation from western Africa also got underway.
Profit-seeking city merchants sometimes cast a wide
net to fill their shares of the hold. During the 1690s,
for example, several hundred Africans were brought
to New York from Madagascar, an island off the
east coast of Africa. Another 117Malagasy captives
reached New York in 1721 (Hershkowitz 2003). As
the eighteenth century advanced, the commercial
networks that brokered the slave trade reached deeper
into the African interior and spread farther along
the coasts. Five key areas in western Africa funneled adults and children into colonial Manhattans
homes, shops, and industrial yards: the Senegambia,
Sierra LeoneLiberia, the Gold Coast, the Bight of
Benin, and the Niger Delta (Heywood and Thornton
2009b:2934).
The two maps in Figure27 call attention to the
discrepancy between the magnitude of the eighteenth-century slave trade and the dearth of European
knowledge about African lives. That eras educated
Europeans were avid readers and writers of travel
accounts, and European publishing houses marketed
multivolume compendia of cultural, historical, and
geographical lore from around the globe. Informa-
Figure 27. Europeans and Africans, 1700s: (top) sources of captives from Africa, eighteenth century;
(bottom) limits of European knowledge of Africa, eighteenth century. (Curtin, Philip D. The Image of
Africa: British Ideas and Action 17801850, Volume 1. 1964 by the Board of Regents of the University of
Wisconsin System. Reprinted by permission of the University of Wisconsin Press.)

tion about Africa collected by Arabic-language geographers also reached European centers of learning
during the eighteenth century, but as historian Philip
Curtin (1964:927) has explained, few principal works
were known, and the heyday of Arabic scholarship on
Africa had already ended by the time Europeans began
trawling for African labor.20 European merchants, scientists, and missionaries who recorded observations
about African societies seldom ventured far from the
shorelines and navigable rivers where captives were
embarked. The interiors that supplied the trade were
relatively unknown.
The Africa that Europeans described was characterized by a mix of religions (animism, Christianity,
Islam), a range of polities (including hierarchically
organized kingdoms), and various methods of reckoning descent. Political and religious offices and
authorities were intricately entwined, and mutual aid
associations were organized around age, gender, and
occupation (see Heywood and Thornton 2009b:2934;
Medford, Brown, Carrington, etal. 2009a:6570;
Medford, Brown, Heywood, etal. 2009b:1622; Medford, Carrington, etal. 2009:4041). Africans also had
a wide array of understandings about the reciprocities
that bound the living and the dead.
Burial Logistics and Labor

Europeans who visited central and western Africa
during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries took
note of typical burial places. Journal keepers and letter writers recorded that Africans were laid to rest in
cemeteries located on the outskirts of homesteads and
settlements, under house floors, and in the churchyards Christian missionaries established in African
political and economic metropoles (Medford, Brown,
Carrington, etal. 2009b:8587; Medford, Brown,
Heywood, etal. 2009b:22).
European visitors also took note of how the dead
were treated. The treatment of the dead encompasses
a range of activities that are undertaken when a death
occurs. These activitiesannouncing the death, preparing the body for burial, selecting a burial site and
digging a grave, transporting the body to the cemetery
On the political twists and turns of the production of knowledge

about Africa during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, see
Mudimbe (1988) and Appiah (1992).
20
and conducting graveside rites, marking and visiting

the graveprovide the framework for our review of
burial logistics and labor. Although the review touches
briefly on documentary information from Africa, the
Caribbean, and the antebellum American South, it is
mainly concerned with raising questions about the
everyday forms of oppression black New Yorkers
faced when they laid their relatives and friends to rest.
Accoutrements and actions on which the archaeological excavation of the New York African Burial Ground
sheds light are identified in boldface type. These
include burial attire (in the form of winding sheets,
shrouds, and street clothes), personal adornment and
other possessions, coffins, grave digging, the placing
of goods in the coffin and on the surface of the grave,
and grave markers.
Announcing the Death

It is not known how news of a death traveled in black
New York during the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries, but chances are good that it would have
spread quickly without the aid of the licensed funeral
inviters that many white New Yorkers employed.21
Manhattan was geographically compact when the
African Burial Ground was in use, as the maps reproduced in the first half of the chapter attest. Although
Africans were residentially dispersed rather than
clustered in a handful of neighborhoods or homes,
the city was only 1 mile wide by 1.5 miles long.
Enslaved men, women, and children traipsed through
its streets and alleys and greeted one another at its
markets and wells. Men gathered in the morning at
the foot of Wall Street to be hired out for the day.
Men and women visited their families and friends
on Sundays and drank and danced at night in private homes (Medford, Brown, Carrington, etal.
2009a:7076). The expanding network of neighborFuneral inviters went door to door to notify mourners about when
and where to pay their respects. During the seventeenth century,
funeral inviters performed their duties under the watchful eyes of the
Reformed Dutch Church as well as the towninviters were instructed
to comport themselves in a civil manner (Minutes of the Burgomasters,
March4, 1661, in New York Orphanmasters 1902:2:8081), obtain
and renew annually a license (minutes of April18, 1691, New York
City Common Council 1905:1:217), and attend to the funerals of
the poor without charge (minutes of April22, 1691, New York City
Common Council 1905:1:221). During the first half of the eighteenth
century, inviters were authorized to charge 8 shillings for announcing
the death of a child, 12shillings for a person between the ages of
12 and 20, and 18shillings for an adult (New York City Common
Council 1905:4:101).
21
hood chapels mapped by archaeologist Nan Rothschild (1990:4356) eventually became a conduit
for funeral news: the number of Africans attracted to
Christian services and catechumen classes increased
as the eighteenth century advanced.
Preparing the Body for Burial

Washing and laying out the dead was womens work in
many colonial American communities. In rural areas,
women, singly or in groups, performed these services
as a mark of respect for the deceased, the family,
and the community. Often, these women were midwives as well. This arrangement endured for varying
lengths of timeAfrican American women prepared
the body for burial well into the twentieth century in
some pockets of rural America (Roediger 1981:169;
Rundblad 1995). In urban centers like New York,
African women probably also would have washed
and laid out their communitys dead when the burial
ground was in use.
African mens participation in preparing the body
for burial did not enter the seventeenth- and eighteenth-century documentary record. Given that Islam
was probably a part of the religious repertoire of
eighteenth-century black New York, it is likely that
washing and laying out the dead was not solely a
female domain. In Islamic tradition, men wash and
cover men, and women wash and cover women.22
Generation as well as gender might also have been a
consideration for black New Yorkers who prepared the
bodies of friends and relatives visited by death. Two
examples illustrate how these fundamental organizing
principles can be entwined when preparing the body
for the grave. Among the Kuranko of Sierra Leone,
where Islamic and traditional practices overlap, a male
friend, a son, or a senior wife past her childbearing
years attends to a dying man. After death, the mans
male friends, assisted by his granddaughters, wash his
corpse in fresh water and daub it with oil (Jackson
1989:69). The Muslim dead in the Sakalava area of
Madagascar are washed and covered by close male
or female kin, with the exception of parents whose
grief is too great (Feeley-Harnik 1991:33).
Many of the individuals interred at the African
Burial Ground would have had family and friends
who could discuss and perhaps help furnish appropriate burial attire, be it a winding sheet, a shroud, or
For a discussion of Islam among Africans in colonial America,
see Gomez (1998:5987).
22
street clothes.23 Yet surely some of the graves held

people whose preferences were unknown because
their stay in the city had been too brief to make deep
social ties.
Europeans noted that in Africa the dead were
wrapped in cloth. Accounts from the 1700s refer
to cloth-wrapped corpses among the Wolof of the
Senegambia region and among a range of coastal
and inland peoples in the geographical precursors of
modern-day Sierra Leone, Liberia, Ghana, Nigeria,
Benin, Angola, and the Congo (Medford, Brown,
Carrington, etal. 2009b:8587). For those who followed the teachings of Islam, the prescribed wrapper
would likely have been made from unstitched white
cloth (Barratt 2005:181). Sugarcane planters in Barbados did not mention whether their African workers were cloth wrapped or clad in everyday clothing
when interred (Handler and Lange 1978:185). White
winding sheets, sometimes supplied by women like
Fanny Kemble, were used in parts of the antebellum
American South. Kemble had been importuned for a
sufficient quantity of cotton cloth to make a windingsheet for a neighbor (Foster 1997:196; Roediger
1981:169).
Did personal adornment and other possessions
remain with the deceased, or were they removed when
the body was washed and covered? According to a
late-eighteenth-century account of burials in Jamaica,
the African dead were arrayed with their jewelryall
the trinkets of the defunct are exposed in the coffin
(Brathwaite 1981:9). The deceased were interred in
their jewelry and clothing in parts of the Gold Coast
(Medford, Brown, Carrington, etal. 2009b:86). Probate records for seventeenth- and eighteenth-century
white New Yorkers indicate that jewelry was typically
bequeathed to descendants and heirs rather than placed
with the dead.
Was the use of coffins widespread in black New
York? As with the preparation of the body, decisions
about a coffin would have mobilized the deceaseds
kin, friends, and neighbors, either to ensure that a
slaveholder provided what was customary or to
Winding sheets and shrouds were integral to English and Dutch
burials during the period when the burial ground was in use. These
two coverings are not always differentiated in documents of the day.
A length of fabric wound around the body and fastened with pins or
hand-tied knots was sometimes called a winding sheet and sometimes
called a shroud. A shroud also referred to a particular type of ensemble
that might include a loose-fitting, long-tailed shirt or chemise, a cap,
and a small piece of cloth to cover the face (Barratt 2005:180181;
Earle 1896:305).
23

help raise cash for the accoutrements that Africans
considered proper and correct.24 Joshua Delaplaine
was one of many artisans that a person in search
of a coffin could call upon. Black cabinetmakers
like William Miller might have been approached for
coffinsMiller is known in the annals of the African
independent church movement for having opened his
Cross Street home in 1795 for planning meetings of
black Methodists who broke away from the John Street
Methodist Church (see Walls 1974). Enslaved Africans
also might have made coffins. Carpentry and coopering were two of the trades in which New Yorks black
workers were clustered (Foote 1991:4144; Medford,
Brown, Carrington, etal. 2009c:5564). Boards cut
from cedar and pine could be had from lumberyards,
such as the one Thomas Shreve, a carpenter and joiner,
kept near William Waltons warehouse on Hunters
Key (New-York Gazette, or, the Weekly Post-Boy,
June3, 1754).25
Coffin burials for Africans in Barbados and the
French West Indies entered the documentary record
at the end of the eighteenth century by way of plantation work logs and eyewitness descriptions (Delpuech
2001; Handler and Lange 1978:191). Reports and
recollections about coffin burials of Africans in the
American South also date from the end of the eighteenth century (Roediger 1981:169). A coffin carried
through the streets of New Orleans in the late 1700s
had six white ribbons attached to its lid; the end of
each ribbon was held by a girl dressed in white (Foster
1997:196). European travel accounts place coffin use
in western Africa in the early 1700s, decades before
Delaplaines daybook was filled in. The accounts
suggest that coffin burials were becoming common
in parts of the Gold Coast and in the city-states of
the Niger Delta during the eighteenth century. In the
Loango region of central Africa, eighteenth-century
reports indicate that coffins were made from woven
Official voices entered the decision-making process when death
pushed Africans in the direction of men like city coroner John Burnet.
At an inquest Burnet attended on March 20, 1758, the jurors were
unable to discover the identity of the African whose case they heard;
among the mans possessions were seven Spanish dollars, a pair of
silver cuff links, a silver ring, a pair of wrought metal buttons, and an
old key (Sypher 2004:82). Whether the man was buried in a coffin did
not enter the record, but municipal arrangements for burying strangers
would have come into play. When black residents of the Almshouse
died, the wardens apparently were responsible for providing a coffin,
as suggested by Joshua Delaplaines daybook (see Chapter10).
24
Newspaper advertisements placed by New York City artisans

are used throughout this report. Unless otherwise noted, such
advertisements are from Gottesman (1938).
25
thatch or grass (Medford, Brown, Carrington, etal.

2009b:86). Coffin burial appears to have become
typical in England and the Netherlands by the end of
the seventeenth century, and perhaps in colonial Manhattan as well (Earle 1896:297; Gittings 1984; Litten
1991; Singleton 1909:253255; Talman 1968a:13).
Selecting a Grave Site and Digging the Grave:

New Yorks African Sextons
Did each funeral party select its own grave site and
supply its own grave digger? Or did a handful of men
routinely undertake these tasks, thereby serving as de
facto caretakers of some, perhaps all, portions of the
African Burial Ground?
In New Amsterdam/New Yorks public cemeteries
and private churchyards, grave digging was centralized rather than ad hoc: grave diggers, acting under the
auspices of city officials and congregational governing
boards, charged a standardized fee for clearing the
surface and breaking the ground. In 1703, when the
city granted Trinitys Vestrymen the right to operate
the town cemetery situated on the north side of the
church, the Common Council set the fee schedule at
1shilling for the grave of a child under age 12 and
3shillings for the grave of a person age 12 and over
(Stokes 19151928:4:443).
Churchyard grave diggers sometimes doubled as
sextons (church officials in charge of property), a
role that conferred community and congregational
esteem. In addition to breaking the ground, sextons
typically oversaw the ringing of the death bell and the
rental of funeral equipment such as palls and boards.
Sextons also helped organize funeral processions and
sometimes officiated at the grave.26 The centrality of
the grave diggersexton to the material and spiritual
sides of interment figured in New Yorks municipal
code. Grave diggers, as mentioned in the chronology
entry for 1731, were excluded from the head count
when the Common Council limited the attendance at
African funerals to 12people.
The names of Manhattans black grave digger
sextons did not enter the documentary record until the
years immediately after the American Revolution, a
period when the citys churches were slow to groom
black leaders (Hodges 1999:180183) and to make
provisions for the burial of black communicants.
Five African American grave diggersextons who
In Manhattans seventeenth-century Dutch community, the funeral
inviter (aanspreeker) typically took on these tasks (Talman 1968a,
1968b).
26
mobilized resources to ensure the safety and dignity
of their communitys dead might have dug graves or
officiated at interments at the African Burial Ground
during the 1780s and 1790s. Among them are Scipio
and Virgil Gray (they may have been brothers, or
father and son), who resided at 47Beekman Street,
near the intersection of Beekman and Gold adjacent to
Anglican St. Georges Chapel. It is likely that Scipio
Gray was a grave digger for the congregation and that
the lot he made available for African interments during
the height of the grave-robbing scandal was part of
St. Georges yard (see the chronology entry for 1788).
Virgil Gray was listed as St. Georges under-Sexton
in the 1794 city directory.
African Society member Lewis Francishis name
appears at the end of the list on the petition reproduced
in Figure25was the first known grave digger at
the new African cemetery on Chrystie Street (see
the chronology entry for 1795). The Chrystie Street
cemetery, which became the final resting place for
black city residents immediately after the African
Burial Ground had closed, was eventually ceded to
St. Philips Church, Manhattans first black Anglican
congregation. Francis served as one of St. Philips
churchwardens (St. Philips Church 1986:18, 90).
Peter Williams,Sr., who, in 1795, helped lead the
formation of the African Methodist Episcopal (AME)
Zion Church, was a grave digger for the John Street
Methodist Church. Williams used the fees he earned
from grave digging to buy his own and his familys
way out of bondage from the John Street congregation,
which had purchased Williams in 1783 (John Street
Methodist Church Archives, New York, Accounts
17831795, Record No.249). When the AME Zion
Church erected a permanent meetinghouse in 1801 at
Church and Leonard Streets, it provided burial vaults
for its members. Samuel Day, a sexton at Mother
Zion, as the church was known, helped oversee the
vaults, which were rapidly filled. Between 1801 and
1807, there were some 150interments annually there
(Duffy 1968:1:219; for information on Samuel Day,
see Municipal Archives of the City of New York,
Death Libers, Liber 1).
Direct linkages between the African Burial Ground,
the African Society, and the African independent
church movement are likely, but it should be kept in
mind that securing burial space would have been a key
concern long before the names of black church leaders and community activists entered the documentary
record. It should also be kept in mind that a commitment to the dead (Wilf 1989:512) was not unique to
black New York. African Americans in Philadelphia,

Newport, Charleston, and Richmond also established
benevolent associations and independent churches
with the explicit goal of providing their communities
a proper place for burial (see Kuyk 1983; Nash 1988;
Wilder 2001).
Transporting the Body to the Cemetery

and Conducting Graveside Rites
Given the location of the African Burial Ground, some
form of procession was probably customary from early
on. Did members of the procession congregate at the
house where the deceased had lived? How large was
a typical funeral party? Recall that the 1731 amendment to the ordinance governing black funerals set
a quota for the attendees but excluded the bearers
from the count. Did the number of bearers increase
after 1731 to exploit the loophole in the law? Was the
body transported to the cemetery in a handbarrow or
a horse-drawn cart, or did the bearers shoulder the
coffin on a bier or a board through the city streets
and, ca.17451760, one of the palisade gates? Did
the cortege proceed to the African Burial Ground in
silence, or with prayers, shouts, dancing, and song?
In Boston, in 1723, a black funeral zig-zagged across
town and into the night, an adaptation of meandering
funeral corteges common in West Africa (Desrochers
2002:648). African funeral processions in the lateeighteenth-century Caribbean and in the antebellum
South were large, song filled, and slow moving (Handler and Lange 1978:186191; Roediger 1981:170).
In Jamaica, bearers raised and lowered the coffin. In
Antigua, they danced a reel (Medford, Brown, Carrington, etal. 2009b:87).
Oppression affected the scheduling as well as the
size of African funerals. Night funerals were common
in both the colonial and the antebellum eras; after
toiling for others from sunup to sundown, Africans
used the night as their own (see Roediger 1981).
Night funerals would have provided opportunities for
geographically distant kin and friends to attend the
graveside rites. Prior to the banning of night funerals
in New York in 1722, black city residents may well
have buried their dead at dusk or after dark. Whether
sundown became a typical time for holding black
funerals after 1722 is unclear.
Did the mourners place any goods in the coffin or
on the surface of the grave, such as food and drink,
utensils and crockery, or flowers and herbs? Expensive mats decorated the surface of eighteenth-century

graves in parts of Sierra LeoneLiberia. Objects reminiscent of a persons life were placed atop graves in
Gold Coast locales; mourners returned to the grave to
care for the objects. Offerings of food and drink and
personal belongings, such as tobacco and pipes, were
placed on graves in some Niger Delta regions (Medford, Brown, Carrington, etal. 2009b:86). Direct historical evidence for grave offerings exists for Jamaica.
During the late 1680s, enslaved Africans in Jamaica
supplied the corpse with bread, roasted fowles, sugar,
rum, tobacco, & pipes (Handler and Lange 1978:199).
An African American folk belief prevalent in parts of
antebellum rural Georgia held that the last objects
touched by the deceased should be placed on his grave
lest his spirit retrieve them from his house. A variant
of the belief was recorded in 1980 among the Kongo
of Central Africa (Thompson 1983:134).
Marking and Visiting the Grave

Were grave markers used to memorialize the dead?
Simple stone slabs like the ones at Trinity Churchyard
(see Figure12) were common in eighteenth-century
Christian cemeteries in rural and urban America,
but whether headstones were typically provided for
churchyard burials of blacks is not known. In 1798 in
Barbados, the manager at Newton Plantation requested
a small stone marker for the grave of one of the plantations much-valued slaves who had been interred
in an Anglican churchyard. Such requests were rare
(Handler and Lange 1978:203, 175178).
Did the deceaseds family and friends return to the
cemetery to visit the grave, either on their own time,
or by absconding from work? Were postinterment
rites conducted?
In Jamaica, during the last half of the eighteenth
century, Europeans noted that Africans heaped dirt on
the month-old graves of their dead. Known as covering the grave, the practice was one of many postinterment rituals that involved returning to the cemetery
to care for the grave and the spirit of its occupant
(Handler and Lange 1978:203204). Philip Madins
1779 account of his journey through the West Indies
called attention to the consequences of neglecting

postinterment rites. Madin learned from a Barbados
planter that the departed husband of an African woman
had troubled her dreams because a graveside ritual
had been delayed (Handler and Lange 1978:205).
Large, noisy Sunday gatherings in Philadelphias
African cemetery were cause for complaint during
the eighteenth century (Nash 1988:1314). Barbadosborn Africans were said in 1789 to be superstitiously
attached to the burial places of their ancestors and
friends (Handler and Lange 1978:209).
In sum, only a fraction of the funeral customs in
the black Atlantic world entered the seventeenth- and
eighteenth-century documentary record. Although
there is no doubt that burial practices in black New
York drew on deep and varied African roots, using
written documents to identify the epicenters of these
practices is a difficult task. Funeral customs in captivesending areas in the interiors of West Central and West
Africa were largely unknown to cultural outsiders.
Archaeologists who study African Diaspora communities have long grappled with uneven documentary records (see Jamieson 1995; Posnansky 1999;
Samford 1996). Yet the archaeology of the African
Diaspora is far more than a search for material signs of
African ethnic identities. Contemporary archaeologists
seek to understand how the experiences of Africans in
the Americas differed from the experiences of other
newcomers. In the words of archaeologist Theresa
Singleton (1999:17): To ignore the consequences
of forced migration, enslavement, legalized discrimination, and racism misses the very essence of how
African Americans created their world and responded
to that of the dominant culture. If the challenge for
archaeology is to pry open places where the material world can inform the analysis of these complexities, then the New York African Burial Ground is an
especially important site. It was the setting for a rite
of passage (burial) that connected the desires of the
living to the treatment of the dead in Americas urban
north, where the pervasiveness of slavery during the
colonial and early federal periods is only now coming
to wide public attention.
Chapter 3
The Archaeological Site

Jean Howson and Leonard G. Bianchi
This chapter focuses on the archaeological site as such.

We discuss the original landscape in the vicinity of the
historic African Burial Ground and then turn to the
19911992 excavation site, which was a much smaller
area, and show its location superimposed on historic
maps. We look at physical impacts to the African
Burial Ground that occurred during the active life of
the cemetery and then summarize the development of
the site over the 200years between the closing of the
cemetery and its rediscovery. Damage sustained to the
site during the archaeological project is described. We
then discuss overall site stratigraphy, the condition of
the graves, and preservation factors.
The Landscape, the Site,

Postcemetery Development,
and Site Preservation
The Historical Landscape
It is small wonder that New Yorkers of the late twentieth century were unaware of the presence of the
African Burial Ground beneath the densely developed
lower Manhattan civic and commercial district (Figure28). The modern topography in the vicinity barely
suggests the original landform. The cemetery was on
uneven terrain that sloped down from the flat of the
Common on the south, the spine of Broadway on the
west, and Pot Bakers Hill on the southeast to the
Little Collect pond or swamp (Figure29). Depictions of the land surrounding the Collect Pond show
undulating terrain, with high bluffspresumably the
Calk-Hook itself (the shell or chalk hill from which
the farm and the pond got their original name)on
the north (Figure30).
Today, a vestige of the original slope can be seen

along Elk Street, with a decrease in elevation of
approximately 20feet from Chambers Street to Duane
Street (Figure31). During the period that the African
Burial Ground was being used, this slope would have
been much steeper. We now know that the bottom of
the hill was approximately 24feet lower in elevation
than it is todayat sea level. Pot Bakers Hill has
been leveled, and Chambers Streets elevation has
changed little. The historic and current elevations of the
African Burial Ground National Historic Landmark are
discussed in the National Historic Landmark Nomination (see AppendixA, Part3 of this volume).
The hillside may not have been ideal for farm
fields,1 but animals grazed on the Common and may
have been a nuisance at the cemetery. The pollen data
(see AppendixG, Part3 of this volume) registering the
African Burial Ground landscape suggest that the flora
was dominated by grass with some insect-pollinated
herbs, such as relatives of goosefoot, chicory, asters;
members of the pea sub-family; and probably some
ragweed. Land clearance and tree removal on Manhattan and in the surrounding region are registered among
the average total tree-pollen percentage, but it does not
appear that there were trees actually within the portion
of the cemetery that was excavated. The northeastern
edge of the African Burial Ground would have been
marshynote the proximity of the small Swamp
depicted on Mrs. Buchnerds Plan (see Figure17 in
Chapter 2); this body of water was also called the
Little Collect on historical maps. Pollen analysis
suggests that the marsh itself did not extend into the
excavated portion of the cemetery, although sedge
Pollen analysis (see AppendixG, Part3 of this volume) identified
a small quantity of cereal-type pollen grains but indicated that the
African Burial Ground site had probably never been farmed.
1
68 Jean Howson and Leonard G. Bianchi
Figure 28. Sanborn Map (Manhattan Land Book 1984-85) of New Yorks civic center area, encompassing the historic African
Burial Ground at the time of the initial cultural resources investigation in 1989. Most of Block 154, bounded by Broadway
and Duane, Reade, and Elk Streets, was covered by parking lots. The map shows the historic Calk Hook Farm (labeled in
upper left corner) and its southern boundary running diagonally from Broadway across the block. The historic edge of the
Collect Pond is shown at the upper right. The small portion of the cemetery that was excavated in 19911992 is outlined
with a red line within the boundary of the African Burial Ground National Historic Landmark (outlined with a thick black
line). New York Citys designated African Burial Ground and the Commons Historic District encompasses a larger area that
includes all of City Hall Park as well as Foley Square (use of 1984-85 Sanborn Map 290 Broadway, New York, NY, reprinted/
used with permission from the Sanborn Library, LLC).
Chapter 3. The Archaeological Site 69
Figure 29. Detail from cartographer John Montressors plan (1766) showing the topography in the general location of the historic African Burial
Ground (circled in white). Hachures show downward sloping north of Pot Bakers Hill and from west to east, beginning about 250 feet east of
Broadway, toward Fresh Water Pond. E denotes the Powder House; F, the soldiers barracks; L, the Gaol; M, the Almshouse/Workhouse; and R, St.
Pauls. Ranelagh was a public pleasure garden (Geography & Map Division, Library of Congress).
Figure 30. A 1798 watercolor of Collect

Pond and vicinity, attributed to Archibald
Robertson (American, 17651835). The view
(to the south) is rather bucolic and idealized
considering the industries such as tanneries
that lined the shore. (The Metropolitan
Museum of Art, The Edward W. C. Arnold
Collection of New York Prints, Maps, and
Pictures, Bequest of Edward W. C. Arnold,
1954 [54.90.168]. Image The Metropolitan
Museum of Art.)
Figure 31. An October 2005 view of the slope on Elk Street within the African Burial Ground National Historic Landmark,
looking south toward City Hall Park (photograph by Rob Tucher).
pollen may indicate intermittently wet conditions in

low spots. Anthony Rutgers and his heirs drained the
low-lying portions of their Calk Hook Farm during the
eighteenth century, reducing the size of the Collect and
Little Collect ponds (Stokes 19151928:3:540, 965
966). It is likely that this action affected the drainage
of the ground within and at the edge of the cemetery.
As the swampy ground surrounding the Little Collect
became drier, the area used for interments may have
been extended to the northeast.2
The Archaeological Site in Relation to the

Historic Cemetery
How much of the African Burial Ground did the
archaeologists excavate? is a question that has been
The Collect was fed by deep springs. In the early to mid-eighteenth
century, it teemed with fish and its water supplied households as well as
industrial yards. The pond was surveyed in 1801, 2years before it began
to be drained (see Stokes 19151928:1:Plate 58A), but the contours of
the adjoining meadowlands and swamps had shifted by then. Rutgers
started draining the swamp in 17331734, to the consternation of nearby
tanners, who complained that the lowering of the ponds water level had
compromised the water supply in their manufacturing yards.
2
asked often during the course of this project. The

maximum historical extent of the cemetery is not
known, and the maps in Chapter2 depict its general
location rather than its precise boundaries. Broadway
(a road leading northward from town that would be
called Great George Street in the early eighteenth
century) may have formed the western edge of the
cemetery. When houses were built along the east
side of that thoroughfare (in place by the 1760s), the
west side of the cemetery would have been truncated.
To the north, the boundary between the Van Borsum
patent and the Damen patent/Calk Hook Farm may
have been maintained, with burials limited to the south
side of the line throughout much of the cemeterys life
(this will be discussed further in Chapter4). Eastern
and southern limits are more problematic. The pottery manufactories would have hemmed in the burial
ground on the east starting in the second quarter
of the eighteenth century, but interments may have
extended along the south side of the pond before that
time. Municipal use of the northern part of the town
Common, now City Hall Park, would have pushed
the cemetery northward in the same period, and the
palisade constructed in 1745 would have formed an
Figure 32. Site location overlaid on Lyne-Bradford Plan (1730). The ropewalk (shown lined with trees) is the alignment of presentday Broadway. The dashed north-south line that runs through the excavation site represents the boundary between the North and
West Wards of the city. Scale is 1 inch = approximately 350 feet (Rare Books Division, The New York Public Library, Astor, Lenox and
Tilden Foundations).
effective southern boundary, at least while it was in

place (until approximately 1760).3
It is possible the cemetery grew in area during
its early period (whether in the seventeenth or early
eighteenth century) and then constricted during the
second half of the eighteenth century, as various kinds
of development encroached. With this constriction,
the density of interments and the superimposition
of graves within the remaining ground would have
increased.
The excavated site was located in the north part
of the cemetery along the Van Borsum patent/Calk
Hook Farm boundary. In Figures3234, the outline
of the New York African Burial Ground archaeological excavation is superimposed on eighteenth-century
maps provided in Chapter2. As can be seen from
these figures, the excavation site was in a portion of
The boundary given for the National Historic Landmark (NHL) was
partly based on historic documentation but was partly drawn with
reference to the likelihood of preservation in the blocks surrounding
the archaeological site (see AppendixA, Part3 of this volume). The
southern extent of the cemetery was never clearly established for the
NHL nomination, and later excavations at the north end of City Hall
Park and on Chambers Street revealed the presence of graves near
the north foundation of the Tweed Courthouse and at the perimeter of
the northern part of City Hall Park. The cemetery probably extended
farther south than the NHL boundary.
3
the cemetery that remained available for interments

throughout the eighteenth centurythat is, it did not
see construction of private houses and industries,
military structures, or public buildings, as did the
perimeter area. The only known structure within the
excavation site that dates to the life of the cemetery
(other than the graves themselves) was the fence that
apparently ran along the boundary between the Van
Borsum patent and the Calk Hook Farm.
The archaeological site thus sampled a part of the
historical African Burial Ground where interments
continued to take place until the property was subdivided and developed by the Barclay and Kip families
(1787 and 1795 respectively) and the cemetery was
closed. And, because the overall area that could be
used for interments was constricting owing to surrounding development (the potteries, the palisade, the barracks, public buildings, and houses) we believe that the
archaeological site included a part of the cemetery that
would have been intensively used during the second and
third quarters of the century. We also posit, however,
that it included a part of the cemetery (to the north of
the Van Borsum patentCalk Hook Farm boundary) that
was only used during the final quarter of the century and
thus is less densely packed with graves. This argument
is further developed in Chapters4 and 9.
Figure 33. Site location overlaid on the Maerschalk Plan

(1754). The dashed line crossing the excavation site may
represent the boundary between the burial ground and the
Rutgers Calk Hook Farm at the time the map was made. The
area containing excavated graves spanned this line. Scale is
1 inch = approximately 200 feet (Geography & Map Division,
Library of Congress).
Figure 34. Site location overlaid on the Ratzer Map (1767). The solid line crossing the excavation site may represent the boundary between the
cemetery/Van Borsum patent and the Calk Hook Farm at the time the map was made. The area containing excavated graves spanned this line. The
dashed-dotted line parallel to Broadway is the ward boundary (Geography & Map Division, Library of Congress).

The total area designated an NHL is approximately
7acres, and the Van Borsum Patent comprised approximately 6.6acres. The area investigated archaeologically covered 27,000square feet of Block154, and
the portion where burials were excavated comprised
about 9,500square feet. Using 6acres as a low-end
estimate of the historic expanse of the African Burial
Ground, the excavated area containing burials may
represent just 3.6percent of the original cemetery. The
number of graves excavated within the archaeological
site was 424. If we were to assume that the density
of burials was similar over the whole of the African
Burial Ground, 6acres could have accommodated
over 11,600burials. Based on the density encountered
within the excavated portion, it is estimated that an
additional 200300graves were left unexcavated
on Block154, within the Pavilion site (now the
reinterment and memorial site) alone. As noted, the
excavated site contains a portion of the cemetery
that was very densely used and a portion that was
relatively thinly used, so there is room for error in
either direction.
Another way to estimate the total number of people
buried in the African Burial Ground is to attempt to
project the total number of Africans who might have
died in the city during the years of the cemeterys use.
This is problematic, because although we do have
census data for blacks for some years, we do not have
any data on death rates. Bills of mortality available
for Philadelphia in the period 17671775 indicate an
average of 75burials of Africans per year; this represents about 7burials for every 100blacks per year, a
rate about 50percent higher than among whites (Nash
1988:34). If a similar death rate applied to New York,
about 219blacks would have been buried in 1771
based on that years census count of 3,137. If we use
this same death rate for each census year, and smooth
the rate of population growth (or decrease) between
the census years, the numbers of deaths of Africans
in New York would be calculated at 14,010 for the
period 16981795.4 This number is close enough to the
Neither a constant death rate nor a smooth population trend is
historically likely, of course. Disease may have created spikes in the
death rate, and importations would have caused fluctuations in the
rate of population growth. The period of the British occupation during
the war saw both a swollen black population and increased deaths.
It is also very likely that infantsand especially newbornswere
consistently undercounted in the census (as well as in the mortality
bills). Infants also may be underrepresented in the burial ground owing
to poor preservation. If the total number of blacks who died in New
York is estimated at 30percent higher in order to include missing
infants, then the total population of the African Burial Ground may
have been well over 15,000.
4
estimate of 11,600individuals based on area to allow

for a general estimate of 10,00015,000individuals
for the cemetery as a whole. Using the estimates based
on area, the 419individuals that are represented by
skeletal remains would be a 3.61percent sample of a
mortuary population spanning a 100150-year period.
Using estimates based on projecting numbers of deaths
from population statistics, the 419individuals would
be a 2.97percent sample.
Impacts to Graves during

the Cemeterys Use
It is impossible to know for certain all of the times and
places graves would have been disturbed over the life
of the burial ground, especially because the date of its
inception and its full geographical extent (particularly
on the south and east sides) are not known. Known
and likely impacts are summarized here.
The development of the pottery industries would
have been the first major impact. It is not known
whether the stoneware potteries located east of
the excavated site stood within the original burial
ground. If so, their construction surely would have
destroyed existing graves. We do know for certain
that pottery waste was dumped on the cemetery,
because such a dump was encountered in the eastern part of the site.
The construction of dwellings (with associated gardens, fences, and outbuildings) is likely to have disturbed graves. The locations of eighteenth-century
dwellingson Broadway and possibly on the east
side of the cemetery at the stoneware potteries
were outside the area excavated archaeologically.
The construction of municipal and military facilities in what is now City Hall Park during the eighteenth century may have impacted the southernmost
graves. This area is south of the excavated site.
The construction and maintenance of the town
palisade probably disturbed graves along its alignment. The palisade was located to the south of the
excavated site.
The interments of prisoners in the southern part of
the ground by the British army during the occupation may have disturbed or destroyed existing
African burials. Again, this impact was probably
to the south of the excavated site.
The archaeological excavation revealed that tannery waste (i.e., cattle bone, hoof, and horn) was

dumped in the northern part of the cemetery while
it was active.
Graves were robbed for cadavers in the 1780s.
It was not unusual for eighteenth-century cemeteries
to have been encroached upon by construction and
intrusions by animals. The African community may
have suffered these depredations largely in silence,
although protests may have gone unrecorded. Efforts
to protect the burial ground from depredations were
not documented until the most egregious of the
encroachmentsthe exhumation of newly interred
bodies for dissectioncaused a public outcry (see
Chapters2 and 9). In the case of intact coffins that
proved empty, body snatching by medical students
may be an explanation, and two individuals, in Burials323 and 364, were probably reburied after dissection (see burial descriptions in Part2 of this volume
and discussion in Chapter9). By and large, however,
within the small portion of the cemetery that was
excavated archaeologically, severe disturbances to
burials appeared to date to later periods, after the
cemetery ceased to be used for interments.
Postcemetery Development
The Earliest Street and Lot Development
and the Fill
The African Burial Ground was subject to 200years
of building construction and demolition, street maintenance, and utility installation once interments ceased.
The portion of the cemetery that was excavated survived not only the early development of urban residential lots but also much more massive, later construction
phases, owing to three factors: (1)an alley was laid
out in the 1790s through the middle of the block,
and portions of this alley were relatively undisturbed
subsequently; (2)some of the structures built on the
lots had relatively shallow basements; and (3)most
important, in the final years of the eighteenth century
and the early years of the nineteenth century, the lowlying terrain of the African Burial Ground was covered
with landfill to bring the area up to a level grade, thus
protecting graves from later construction damage.
After the streets crossing the cemetery were mapped
out (Table10), and the Barclay land (part of the old
Calk Hook Farm) and the Kip land (the old Van Borsum patent) were surveyed and subdivided into lots
(see Chapter2 and Figures22 and 24), the way was
open for intensive residential and commercial develThe New York African Burial Ground
opment of the African Burial Ground. As discussed in

Chapter2, African community leaders petitioned for
and received a subsidy to purchase land and establish
a new cemetery elsewhere at this time.
During the period of its confiscation by the purchasers and developers of individual lotsa process
that probably took a decade or more (at least from the
1787 survey of the Calk Hook until the 1795 survey
of the Kip property)the African Burial Ground may
have witnessed an almost daily struggle on the part of
the relatives and descendants of those buried there to
maintain their ties to the place and the dignity of grave
sites. There were doubtless many visible, marked
graves at the time of initial development of some of
the lotsevidence from the archaeological excavation
indicates that markers such as headstones or cobble
outlines were used (see section on overall site stratigraphy). These would have been covered over, if not
destroyed, in the first phase of lot development.
Reade Street and Anthony (later called Barley
and subsequently renamed Duane) Street were laid
out perpendicular to Broadway, but since the property line between Barclay and Kip lands was not, an
extra triangular piece of property remained through
the middle of the block when the rectangular Reade
Street lots were first laid out. An alley, later to be
called Republican or Manhattan Alley, was laid out
running north from Reade Street and turning at a right
angle to run east-west behind the Reade Street lots,
taking up a portion of the extra triangle and providing additional frontage to maximize the potential for
building houses. But this still left a small gore, a
triangular piece of land, on the north side of the alley,
abutting the rear yards of the Duane Street lots. The
pieces of the gore were all eventually purchased and
consolidated with the Duane Street lots, but the alley
remained in place through the twentieth century. Burials survived beneath a portion of this alley.
What about the new building lots? The history
of property transactions from 1787 onward within
Block154 has received detailed scrutiny, although
properties on blocks surrounding this one have not
been researched in as much detail.5 The important
Preliminary research was conducted for the Stage IA background
study on the site (Ingle etal. 1990). Subsequently, more-detailed
research on postcemetery ownership and occupation of lots that
were excavated was conducted by both Historic Conservation and
Interpretation (HCI), by Jean Howson, Richard L. Porter, and Stephen
Barto, and later John Milner Associates (JMA), by Thelma Foote and
Reginald Pitts. Research relevant to the time periods represented
archaeologically is presented in the report on the nonburial component
of the 290Broadway site (Cheek 2003).
5

Table 10. Streets Laid Out through the African Burial Ground
Street
History
Duane Street
The segment of this street to the east of Broadway was called Anthony Street when it was
mapped at the time of the Calk Hook Farm subdivision in 1787 (see Figure 22). It was known
as Barley Street at the turn of the century and renamed Duane Street in 1809. Proprietors of
abutting lots were ordered to dig out and fill in [Minutes of the Common Council, May 18,
1795, in New York City Common Council 1917:2:149] the street in 1795. (This street should
not be confused with the later Anthony Street two blocks to the north.)
Elk Street
This street was known as Ann Street when mapped at the time of the Van Borsum patent subdivision in 1795 (see Figure 24). Regulated in 1803, at which time it was called Elm Street.
Reade Street
Laid out in 1795 at the time of the Van Borsum patent subdivision (see Figure 24). Formerly
Reed Street.
Republican Alley
The alley was called Manhattan Place or Alley in the nineteenth century. Laid out in 1795 at
the time of the Van Borsum patent subdivision (see Figure 24), although its position shifted
south and west compared to the alley shown on the map. The proprietors of abutting lots were
ordered to fill up the alley in 1803.
Chambers Street
In 1796, a triangular wedge out of the Negros Burial Ground (i.e., the southern edge of the
Van Borsum Patentsee Figure 24) was acquired by the city from the patent heirs for laying
out this street to the east of Broadway (New York City Common Council 1917:2:250).
Note: See Hunter Research (1994) for details and sources for each street within New Yorks African Burial Ground and
the Commons Historic District. Figures 22 and 24 are in Chapter 2.
issues for understanding the final years of the excavated portion of the African Burial Ground are (1)the
timing of initial building construction on the new city
lots and (2)the possible construction of a new fence at
the rear of some Duane Street building lots, along the
old Calk Hook FarmVan Borsum patent boundary.
The excavated portion of the cemetery spanned
the line between lots laid out in 1787 (on the north)
and those laid out in 1795 (on the south). Did burials
continue on the lots until houses were actually built,
and when was that? Or did burials continue only in
the southern area in the years between 1787 and 1795?
The Barclays began to sell and lease lots on Duane
Street after 1787, but documentary evidence indicates
that Lots1217 were all developed (built on) in the
period 17941799, and the first house within the
excavated portion of Block154 was built in 1794 on
Lot12 (Cheek 2003:Chapter4). Thus, it is possible
burials continued over the entire area up until 1794.
However, if a new fence was built along a stretch of
the diagonal boundary line in order to demarcate the
rear of Duane Street lots, it is possible those lots were
off-limits for interments even before the construction
of houses began.
Houses on Lots12, 15, and 16 were the earliest
built (Cheek 2003:Chapter4). Damage to graves was
caused when various types of pit features were dug in

the rear parts of these lots (Figures35 and 36).
The earliest houses were not destined to last long.
Beginning in the 1790s and into the first decade of
the nineteenth century, the city undertook the filling in of the marshy areas around the Collect Pond,
then of the pond itself, along with the grading of the
hills in the area and the leveling of streets. Property
owners were obliged to fill their own lots as well as
regulate (build up or dig out) the streets on which
they fronted. Filling of the low-lying properties and
streets on the African Burial Ground commenced
in the 1790s. Duane Street property owners were
required to build up the street in 1795, and Republican Alley was ordered to be filled up in 1803 (Hunter
Research 1994:2931, 5556, 5961). Once streets
were leveled, the Common Council ordered sunken
(low-lying) lots along them to be filled in (New York
City Common Council 1917:2:327328). The pit and
shaft features in the rear yards of Duane Street lots
that had been built on before the filling were covered
over and buried, just as were the graves of the African
Burial Ground. Houses had to either be raised to the
new street level or torn down and replaced. Once a
lot was filled, building construction would begin at
the new surface, and new building foundations and
Figure 36. In situ photograph of Burial 297. A privy shaft at the

rear of Lot 16 truncated the entire western part of the grave (top of
photograph), leaving only the legs below the knees and the eastern
portion of the coffin. Scale shown is in inches; north is to the right
Figure 35. In situ photograph of Burial 153. A privy shaft at the
rear of Lot 15 truncated the entire eastern part of the grave
(bottom of photograph). The disturbed parts of the skeleton
had been tossed aside and were found on the opposite side of
the privy in a pile. Ruler is marked in feet; north is to the right
basements often extended only into the fill, not into

the graves.
Fill encountered at the New York African Burial
Ground archaeological site was approximately 13feet
deep on the west (behind Lot12) and approximately
24feet deep on the east near Elk Street, reflecting the
original lay of the land. Some of this fill was from the
time of the initial leveling of the area (notably behind
Lot12, where it was sampled and could be dated on
the basis of artifacts it contained), but much of the
site also contained heavy demolition fill from various
demolition and rebuilding episodes over the course of
the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Even these episodes failed to destroy hundreds of underlying graves,
however, because they were so deeply buried.
Building Construction in the Nineteenth

and Twentieth Centuries
Maps from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries
depict the density of development on Block154 (FigThe New York African Burial Ground
ures3739). Every one of the lots that the Kip and

Barclay families sold had structures on them before
the middle of the nineteenth centurymany had
houses at the street front and at the back, along the
alley.
On some lots, successive buildings eventually
obliterated all physical traces of the cemetery. This
was true for all of the lots along Broadway, where
the graves were not protected by deep fill and where
large commercial structures had deep basements. We
know from a newspaper reference that bones were
removed during the 18451846 construction of the
A. T. Stewart Store on Broadway between Chambers
and Reade Streets (New York Times, November14,
1878). Lot12 was in a part of the site where fill was
relatively shallow, but a building with a deep basement
extending to the rear of the lot had never been constructed there, so graves were intact in that area. The
most recent structure on Lot13 had a deep basement,
and no graves were preserved within its footprint (see
Figure7, pocket map). Because of a combination of
shallower basements and deeper fill to the east, buildings in Lots1418, 20, and 21 did not destroy all of
the graves (see AppendixA, Part3 of this volume, for
schematic cross sections through the blocks within the
NHL that show the projected level of graves in relation to building basements). Graves were preserved
in place within the alignment of Republican Alley
Figure 37. Detail from Perris Map of 1853. By the mid-nineteenth century, every property that had been laid out in the 1780s and 1790s
had been developed, some having already seen successive building phases. Republican Alley was known as Manhattan Place at this time,
and most of the lots that backed onto it had buildings at both front and rear. Elm (now Elk) Street had not been laid through to Chambers
Street yet. The footprint of the Federal building at 290 Broadway (as originally proposed) is indicated with a heavy black outline. The
outline of the archaeological site is indicated with a thin black line within this footprint (The Lionel Pincus and Princess Firyal Map
along a short stretch of the north-south leg and behind

Lots1215, but to the east, all graves that once lay
beneath the alley had been disturbed by the excavation
of the foundation for 22Reade Street.
Even though hundreds of graves were preserved
beneath the alley or the lot fill, considerable damage was caused by successive building episodes and
related excavations. The site map (see Figure7, pocket
map) indicates areas where historic excavations for
structures such as foundation walls, footings, drains, or
elevator shafts clearly disturbed or destroyed graves.
Known burials that were damaged prior to the archaeological investigation are listed in Table11. For ease
of reference, the historic lot numbers are used, but it
should be remembered that the lots postdate and have
no relevance for the New York African Burial Ground
itself. Feature numbers are arbitrary consecutive
numbers assigned to pits, privies, drains, footings,
etc., that were encountered during the archaeological
excavations. These are described in full in the report
of the 290Broadway nonburial component (Cheek

2003). Examples of graves damaged in the second
or third phases of development at the site are shown
in Figures40 and 41. Table11 lists only those graves
for which historical impacts resulted in removal of
skeletal remains; compression also caused damage.
Damage Sustained during

the Project
Burial1, the first grave discovered at the New York
African Burial Ground, was uncovered during backhoe
excavation of a test trench and was truncated by the
machine. Subsequently, excavation proceeded so as
to delineate burials by identifying the outline of the
grave shafts prior to beginning meticulous hand excavation. Nevertheless, numerous graves were partially
disturbed during backhoe clearing of demolition fill
Figure 38. Detail from Robinson and Pidgeon Atlas (1893) showing late-nineteenth-century development in the area of the African
Burial Ground. The former boundary between the Van Borsum Patent and the Calk Hook Farm was shown running diagonally across
Block 154. Brick structures that covered entire lots now characterized the blocks in the area, and the Tweed Court House, facing
north onto Chamber Street, had been built in City Hall Park. The footprint of the Federal building at 290 Broadway (as originally
proposed) is indicated with a heavy black outline. The outline of the archaeological site is indicated with a thin black line within this
footprint (The Lionel Pincus and Princess Firyal Map Division, The New York Public Library, Astor, Lenox and Tilden Foundations).
Figure 39. Detail from the Bromley Map (1934) showing development in the area of the African Burial Ground. The former
boundary between the Van Borsum Patent and the Calk Hook Farm was shown running diagonally across Block 154. The eightstory Hall of Records, on Block 153 on the east side of Elm (Elk) Street, was built on the leveled eighteenth-century Pot Bakers
Hill. Because of the previous leveling and the deep sub-basement of this building, it is unlikely any burials survive on the block.
Burials may be extant beneath the Jones and Court Square buildings on Block 155 just across Reade Street, however, as this
would have been a lower-lying area and the basements are not as deep. Buildings are discussed in the National Historic Landmark
nomination (see Appendix A.2 in Part 3 of this volume) and in the designation report for New Yorks African Burial Ground and the
Commons Historic District. The footprint of the Federal building at 290 Broadway (as originally proposed) is indicated with a heavy
black outline. The outline of the archaeological site is indicated with a thin black line within this footprint (use of 1934 Bromley
Map reprinted/used with permission from the Sanborn Library, LLC).

Table 11. Damage to Known Burials Caused by Historic Development
Type of Feature, by Lot
Impact
Lot 12
Cistern
truncated Burials 58 and 63
Lot 13
Concrete foundation
truncated Burials 10, 97, 102
Stone foundation
truncated Burials 25, 26, 32, and 52; damaged Burials 83 and 84
Lot 14
Foundation
truncated Burials 125, 162, 188, 228, 275, 277, 287
Basement at front of lot
disturbed Burials 152 and 178
Shallow pit (Feature 106)
possibly damaged Burial 125
Lot 15
Privy (Feature 56)
truncated Burial 153; damaged Burial 203
Privy (Feature 77)
damaged Burials 192, 193, 252, and possibly 225
Pit (Feature 91)
slightly damaged Burial 158
Brick drain (Feature 100)
damaged Burial 213
Lot 16
Privy (Feature 58)
truncated Burial 297; damaged Burial 181
Lot 17
Foundation
damaged Burials 351, 370, 428
Lot 18
Foundation excavations
damaged Burials 410, 413, 420
Footing
damaged Burial 414
Elevator shaft
damaged Burials 417, 418, 423, and 434
Broadway lots
Foundations
damaged Burials 15, 36, 41, 46, 54, 67, 81, 89, and 93
Reade Street lots

Foundations, mid-block
damaged Burials 66, 70, 118, 168, 170, and 189
Foundation, 22 Reade St.
damaged Burials 308, 316
over large areas. Such damage is noted in the burial

descriptions contained in Part2 of this volume. It is
worth noting that 30 of the 31skulls that were considered to be intact for the purposes of skeletal analysis
were recovered among the first 100burials excavated,
which suggests that the quality of excavation suffered
as pressure to speed the work increased.
Construction of 290Broadway proceeded throughout the archaeological field project, and damage to
the burials continued despite the presence of the
archaeological team. Excavations for massive footings in the eastern part of the site were responsible
for the destruction of many graves (Figure42). Four
openings for these 10-by-10-foot footings were excavated along a north-south alignment, each disturbing
a 15-by-15-foot area (one is shown on the site plan,
Figure7, pocket map). Based on the density of burials
in the southeastern part of the site (an area that was not
even fully exposed), it is likely that dozens of graves
were destroyed by each of the footings. Construction
Figure 40. In situ photograph of Burial 97. A concrete wall

between Lots 12 and 13 obliterated the eastern half of
the grave. Ruler is marked in feet; north is to the right
in 1991 of a perimeter wall for 290Broadway also

destroyed or damaged an unknown number of graves
along Elk Street and possibly also along Duane Street.
Another large area was disturbed during construction
activity in the rear part of Lot16. The use of heavy
machinery on the site caused damage to additional
graves, although the extent of the damage is more
difficult to assess.
Overall Site Stratigraphy

As noted, clearing in most areas was done mechanically down to a level where graves were clearly visible
and sometimes to the very tops of coffins. It appears
that pressure to speed the excavation often led to the
disregard of deposits above this level. It is possible
that historical development had already destroyed
the earlier ground surfaces. But any historic surfaces
that may have been extant beneath the fill may have
been stripped in the interest of reaching the burials
quickly. In some areas, stripping proceeded until the
tops of coffins (readily recognizable from wood stain-
Figure 41. In situ photograph of Burial 213. A brick drain

constructed some time in the nineteenth century extended down
through the grave, removing a portion of the coffin and skeletal
remains but leaving the rest of the burial remarkably intact.
Ruler alongside the grave is marked in feet; north is to the right
ing and in situ nails) were observed. This destroyed

the opportunity for the archaeologists to examine
most of the site for evidence of grave markers and
items that had been deliberately placed on the tops
of graves. The exception was the north-south leg of
Republican Alley, where the surface of some graves
was present (Figure43). This was the first site area
excavated archaeologically and also the shallowest,
requiring hand excavation of upper layers; it is possible that there the excavators had the luxury of time
enough to carefully look for old surfaces.
Despite not having the original or eighteenth-century ground surface over the majority of the archaeo-
Figure 42. In situ drawing of Burial 362, which was nearly destroyed
by the installation of a massive concrete footing for the 290 Broadway
building in February of 1992. The grave held a man of undetermined
age. His cranium and a portion of the coffin were left relatively
undisturbed. Numerous other burials were also damaged or destroyed
by this footing and three others in the eastern part of the site. Scale is 1
inch = 1 foot; north is to the right (drawing by M. Schur).
logical site, it is possible to get a sense of the lay

of the land by looking at the recorded elevations of
burials. The microtopography of the portion of the
cemetery that was studied archaeologically appears to
have included a general northeast-trending slope and
possibly also terrace areas, where the ground was
flatter and where burials were concentrated. Figure44
is a schematic profile of the excavated graves from
west (closest to Broadway) to east (at Elk Street).
Concentrations of burials are seen at 50100East and
at 110145East. The apparent precipitous drop-off at
100East is the effect of the construction disturbance
at the rear of Lot16.
When each interment originally took place, the soil
from the surface of the ground and from the grave
shaft was removed and then redeposited in the shaft.
Thus material from the surface at the time of burial
ended up mixed in with the fill in the grave shaft. In
many cases, nonburial deposits surrounding or overlyThe New York African Burial Ground
ing the burials, but contemporary with the cemetery,

are reflected in the contents of the shafts. For instance,
some burials found in the area where the stoneware
potteries were dumping kiln waste contained large
amounts of that waste in the grave shafts. In other
cases, the grave-shaft contents reflected the presence
of a sparse sheet scatter of domestic debris (bits of
glass, brick, smoking pipes, or ceramics) or of a fairly
heavy deposit of animal bone and horn (probably
waste material from a tannery). Materials present
in the grave shafts can be used to reconstruct the
eighteenth-century ground-surface deposits over the
site area. For our purposes, this information is useful
for dating graves and for understanding the series of
encroachments that affected the burial ground (see
further discussion in Chapter4).
Post-burial-ground features and deposits, which
were located north of the cemetery or which overlay
or cut into the cemetery deposits, were also excavated
during the field project (Cheek 2003). Some of these
represented distinct phases of use of Block154. Cheek
(2003) designated development Phases16 for the
site as a whole:
Phase 1 (through 1787)African Burial Ground
and contemporary uses including the potteries
Phase 2 (17881803)initial urbanization
Phase 3 (17991807)the raising of AnthonyBarley-Duane Street
Phase 4 (18071890s)development
Phase 5 (19001990)development [also the razing of structures in the 1960s in advance of an
aborted civic center development project]
Phase 6 (19901992)construction of 290Broadway
The African Burial Ground cemetery was still in
use during the first part of Cheeks Phase2, through
1795.
Condition of Graves
The wet conditions at the New York African Burial
Ground site were not a surprise, given the proximity
of the Collect Pond and surrounding wetlands (the
latter possibly at one time extending into the area of
the cemetery). Moreover, many of the graves were
themselves at or below modern sea level. During
excavations, the water table often was high enough
to flood burials, and it is assumed that fluctuating
moisture levels affected them throughout the period
Figure 43. In situ photograph of Former Republican

Alley, as the surface of graves was revealed. View is
toward the south (photograph by Dennis Seckler).
Figure 44. Schematic diagram of elevations of burials (shown as diamonds) from west to east. Elevations are in feet above/below current sea level
(measured at the highest point of the in situ skeletal remains). West is to the left. Grid line 0 on the West-East site grid is 280 feet east of Broadway.
Differing scales along the X- and Y-axes exaggerate the variation in elevations.
of their interment, which in most cases would have

been more than 200years.
Preservation of both skeletal remains and artifacts
was dependent on soil conditions. Project conservator CherylJ. LaRoche (2002:17) described these as
follows:6
The presence of naturally occurring alluvial
clays with lenses of Cretaceous sands... contributed to the variety of environmental conditions.... Many of the natural catalysts of artifact
and skeletal deterioration were in these soils.
Sand allowed water seepage, while the alluvial
clay acted as a hydrophilic substrate, binding
The African Burial Ground project conservators were Gary
McGowan and CherylJ. LaRoche. This text is from an unedited draft
report of conservation activities prepared by LaRoche.
6
free water to the adjacent artifacts and skeletal

materials. The wet, gelatinous consistency of
[some of] the skeletal remains upon excavation
was indicative of waterlogged conditions. The
abundance of oxygen, inherent in alluvial clays,
increased acidity (lowered pH), which broke
down organic resins. Furthermore, this oxygenated environment encouraged the deterioration
of ferric alloys through oxidation as the free
oxygen was tied to the groundwater. Thus, iron
preservation at the 290Broadway Block was
poor due, in part, to oxygenated conditions and
electrochemical activity.
When a catalyst, such as oxygen, is depleted,
the soil becomes anoxic, and agents of deterioration that are dependent on an oxygenated
environment rapidly decline while there is a

corresponding increase in anaerobic activity.
This anoxic environment harbored anaerobic
bacteria, which accelerated the rate of degradation of organic materials. Several artifacts
exhibited blackened surfaces, evidence of metal
sulfides produced by sulfate-reducing bacteria associated with anaerobic conditions. The
microenvironment produced by the permeable
sand lenses fostered its own unique degradation pattern. While these more permeable loci
are less biologically reactive, they can be more
chemically reactive. As one agent of deterioration diminished, another flourished.
In addition, the chemical environment caused by
decomposition of the human remains in each grave
would have affected the preservation of items such
as cloth or artifacts.
Soil chemistry was not tested during excavations
of the graves or subsequently in the laboratory. Differential preservation conditions generally cannot
be determined from burial to burial (unless obvious
factors such as excessive moisture are mentioned in
the notes), and this has implications for studying the
distribution of burial artifacts. In other words, the
presence or absence of burial items cannot be checked
against preservation conditions. For graves where no
artifactual material was recovered, the possibility of
total decomposition should be considered. For example, pins were often noted in the field but not recoverable, and it is possible some were so decomposed that
they were not distinguishable to the naked eye in the
field. Similarly, recovered pewter- and bone-button
fragments were very poorly preserved, and it is not
inconceivable that such items were simply no longer
extant in some burials. Where field notes indicate that
the preservation was poor, determinations as to the
absence of burial artifacts (or skeletal elements, for
that matter) should be qualified.
Post-interment animal activity (worm action and
small mammal burrows) was noted in numerous
graves. Changes in drainage caused by filling and
construction over the centuries would have created
fluctuations in moisture conditions, and such fluctuations themselves are very damaging. Pollutants from
nineteenth- and twentieth-century use of the property
that seeped through the soils may have altered the
preservation environment of graves. Finally, the exposure of skeletal remains through excavation presented
an immediate danger of deterioration. Most important,
if the bones were soft from moisture, drying would
cause them to become friable.7 Field protocols for

ensuring maximum stabilization of remains and artifacts are noted in Chapter1.
All recorded observations of the in-field condition
of individual graves are noted in the burial descriptions
in Part2 of this volume.8 The condition of artifacts and
products of decomposition noted during laboratory
processing are discussed in the appropriate artifact
chapters (Chapters1114).
Preservation Assessment
Field records were reviewed for information pertinent to the likely presence or absence of artifacts in
graves based on preservation factors, including damage sustained to burials, degree of disarticulation and
disturbance, and whether excavation was complete.
This is crucial to the analysis of artifact-frequency
distributions, which should only include burials for
which the preservation of items was at least possible.
A simple logic was applied, taking into account the
fact that in an intact grave, artifacts might survive
even where bone does not (recall the number of coffins, especially very small ones, that did not contain
extant human remains). Burials were assigned yes
or no values depending on whether artifacts could
be expected. For a small number of burials, we also
needed to take into account which part of a burial
had survived. Pins were most frequently found on
the cranium, so burials with missing crania but good
preservation otherwise were noted. The preservation
field in the burial data table contains a value for each
burial as defined in Table12.
This artifact preservation assessment does not
correspond to the cranial and postcranial preservation value assigned to the skeletal remains for each
Conservation measures, such as consolidation of friable material
with PVA (polyvinyl acetate), were sometimes taken in the field.
Trained conservation staff was not always on hand during the
fieldwork, however. The professional conservators subsequently
indicated that the overuse of PVA sometimes caused soil to bind to
bones and artifacts.
7
Field recording was highly variable. In general, recordation of the

condition of the skeleton, element by element, was much better than
that of the overall grave (notes on the observed condition of in situ
skeletal elements were recorded on forms by the excavation staff of the
Metropolitan Forensic Anthropology Team [MFAT] and are retained
in the project archive). For some burials, detailed notes were taken
on the soil; moisture conditions; consistency and surface condition of
the bone, wood, and artifacts; and damage from exposure. For others,
little or no information on these factors was recorded.
8

Table 12. Preservation Values Used for Burials
Value
Definition
Overall preservation of grave is such that artifacts might be expected to have survived. Skeletal elements from the upper half of the body and/or the coffin outline with nails were found in
situ.
Heavily disturbed or redeposited remains; or the upper body was missing because of truncation by later feature, and no artifacts were found with lower body.
y (no cranium)
Otherwise intact grave where just the cranium had been truncated (cranial pins would be
missing, but survival of other artifacts may be expected).
y (cranium only) Only the cranium was still in its apparent original burial location (pins may be expected, although other artifacts would be missing, as they are rarely present on the cranium).
n (empty coffin)
Human remains (and possibly artifacts) appear to have been removed from otherwise intact
coffin. These are rare cases for which it is believed decay cannot account for the lack of skeletal remains.
n (not excavated) Artifacts were not found, but the burial was not fully excavated at the time the field project
was halted, so their presence cannot be ruled out.
burial (see Skeletal Biology of the New York African

Burial Ground, AppendixD [Blakey and Rankin-Hill
2009b]), which serve a different purpose. Although
some of the factors affecting bony preservation also
apply to artifacts, others do not. For example, even
where the preservation of skeletal remains was minimal, such as in the case of many of the infants, coffins
were clearly defined, and preservation of any other
artifacts that had been placed with the deceased might
be expected. It is worth noting that in several cases
of extremely disturbed remains, copper staining from
pins or tiny pin fragments were nonetheless noted
with the bone.
Discussions of artifact frequencies in subsequent
chapters will indicate the total numbers of burials
considered based on the preservation assessments or
other relevant criteria.
Graves Remaining in Place

at the Site
that time, only some areas had been fully excavated

(i.e.,all burials removed).9 The site plan (see Figure7,
pocket map) depicts the boundary line between the
area that had been fully excavated and that which had
not. It should be noted that between grid lines 110 and
150East, excavated burials seem to be equally dense on
either side of this line. The excavation team, however,
clearly indicated that the area eastward of the line had
not been fully excavated and that therefore additional
burials might be present.10
Based on the distribution of burials in areas that
were fully excavated, it is likely burials are present
throughout most of the northern portions of former
Lots1719, 20, and 21 (one possible grave outline
was noted in the northeastern part of the site prior to
halting the excavation). This indicates that the current
memorial site, in fact, contains an intact portion of the
original cemetery containing perhaps 200300graves
beneath up to 25feet of fill soil within the grasscovered enclosure.
The field excavations were stopped only after all burials had been
excavated within the entire footprint of the 290Broadway 34-story
tower. The redesign of the building thus only had to address the
relatively minor Pavilion section.
9
The field excavation was halted by the General Services

Administration (GSA) at the end of July 1992. Graves
for which excavation was already underway at the time
the excavation was halted were filled with vermiculite,
and soil was placed over them. Some were subsequently
removed in October 1992; others were left in place. At
The draft site plan was prepared by field personnel Brian Ludwig and
Margo Schur under the direction of Field Director Michael Parrington. This
plan was used to plot foundations, nonburial features, limits of excavation,
site disturbances, and the site grid on Figure7, pocket map.
10
Chapter 4
Relative Dating
Jean Howson, Warren R. Perry, Augustin F. C. Holl, and Leonard G. Bianchi
This chapter describes the rationale and methodology

for dividing the burial population into temporal groupings. It is emphasized that the chronological sequence
developed here is a relative one and the dates assigned
to each grouping approximate. Burials are assigned
to broad temporal groups on the basis of (1)location
and stratigraphy relative to nonburial features at the
site, (2)artifacts found in direct association with the
deceased or in the grave fill, (3) stratigraphic relationships to other burials, and (4)coffin type. In many
cases, the parameters support each other, strengthening
the assignments, although in other instances, evidence
is ambiguous.
Site Features Relevant for Chronology

Nonburial physical features within the excavated site
that are relevant for understanding the cemeterys use
over time include:
the remains of fences that once crossed the site from
southwest to northeast along the boundary between
the Van Borsum Patent and the Calk Hook Farm
(see Chapters2 and 3);
ditches found in Lot12 that trend in the same direction as the fence;
the scatter of animal bone and cattle-horn core fragments that may represent waste dumping (possibly
from tanneries) over a portion of the north part of
the excavation site;
the stoneware waste dump associated with potteries
that stood on and/or adjacent to the cemetery.
The Fence Lines

Historic maps from 1754 and 1767 depict lines running
diagonally from the southwest starting at Broadway
to northeast across the area of the cemetery, along or

very near the alignment of the Van Borsum patents
northern boundary as it would be established in the
1780s1790s (see Figures22 and 24 in Chapter 2). On
the 1754 Maerschalk map (see Figure19 in Chapter
2 and Figure 33 in Chapter 3), the line is dashed and
the Negros Buriel Ground is clearly labeled to its
south. The fact that the mapmaker depicted a line
suggests, at least, that the boundary somehow was
physically marked on the landscape. There may have
been a fence dividing the Calk Hook Farm from the
burial ground at the time, or perhaps a path ran along
the boundary, leading from the structure depicted on
Broadway eastward to the Pot Baker near the Little
Collect Pond. On the Ratzer plan of 1767 (Figure45;
see Figure20 in Chapter 2 and Figure 34 in Chapter
3), a similarly placed line runs along the south side
of three buildings: one on Broadway, shown with a
second structure to its east, and the presumed pottery
building farther east, shown within a rectangular lot
(which itself may have been enclosed by a fence).
Again, the line extending east from Broadway may
represent a fence, dividing properties on the Calk
Hook Farm (some of which was developed and had
presumably been leased) from land to the south that
is depicted as undeveloped (the cemetery).
Further evidence for the existence of a fence in the
1760s can be found in court records of 18121813
relating to the ownership of the former cemetery. The
heirs to the Van Borsum patent had the land surveyed
in 1784, but arguments arose as to the legality of possession of certain parcels during the period following
the War for Independence. Proceedings included testimony of a number of witnesses as to the boundaries of the burial ground or patent and verification of
tenancy during the period from the mid-eighteenth
century through the 1790s. The summary of the case
(Johnson 18531859:10:355) reads in part:
88 Jean Howson, Warren R. Perry, Augustin F. C. Holl, and Leonard G. Bianchi
Figure 45. 1767 Ratzer Plan (see Figure 20 in Chapter 2 and Figure
34 in Chapter 3) showing a possible fence along the north side of
the cemetery (dashed white) (Geography & Map Division, Library of
Congress).
[The plaintiffs] showed that in May 1768, J.Teller,

their ancestor, entered into possession of a house
which he had built two or three years before on
the negroes burying ground, and which had,
previously to his entrance, been occupied by his
tenant. That he had a fence enclosing the burying
ground, and claimed it as his property, and pastured it, and kept the key of the gate leading to
the ground, and took payment for the use of the
ground, and that it was known and called by the
name of his land and fence. That he continued in
possession until his death in June, 1775, and his
family continued in possession afterwards, and
until... the invasion of New-York in 1776; and
that then the family left the city and retired into
the country; and the British army took possession of the house and lot, and during the course
of the war, and while under the dominion of the
British, the house and fences were destroyed
[emphasis added].
It is possible the Ratzer Plan depicts the fence that
Teller had erected along the north side of the cemetery.
It is doubtful the Teller-phase (ca.1765ca.1776)
burial ground was fully enclosed; the Broadway lots
and the northern boundary may have been fenced. As
the palisade, which once ran along the top of the rise
on the south side of the burial ground, was no longer
in place at the time of the Ratzer Plan, it is possible
that the cemetery had spread southward again. We can

only speculate on the placement of a gateBroadway
seems the most likely location, although access from
behind the barracks or the through the potteries may
have been possible.
Archaeological evidence for fence alignments takes
the form of filled-in postholes. A series of these features was recorded within the excavated site, roughly
along the alignment of the patent boundary (Figure46). The irregularity in the pattern of recorded
postholes, as well as the variation in profile among
those that were excavated, suggests that more than
one fence is represented.
One iteration of the fence may date to the period
from 1787 to ca.1800, when the building lots on
Duane (then Anthony) Street were initially laid out and
developed, as discussed in Chapter3. If the 1787 partition of the Calk Hook lots on Block154 was physically marked out in some waywith a fence or even
just with postsburials in this area would have been
discouraged or prohibited. Lots1216 were initially
sold off with rear property lines that ran diagonally
along the Negroes Burying Ground boundary (as
shown in Figure22 in Chapter 2). From Lot17 eastward, however, properties were consolidated with the
triangular gore of ground to their rears before being
sold as building lots, so there may not have been a
1787 fence behind these properties. It is also possible
that a fence was put up only as construction actually
began on the lots, which was not until 1794.
Moving back in time, the evidence cited above
suggests that John Teller constructed a fence in 1765
or 1768. An earlier fence, the one possibly depicted
on the 1754 map (see Figure19 in Chapter 2 and
Figure 33 in Chapter 3), might have been taken down
sometime before Teller took possession. It is also
possible John Tellers fence was already partially in
place when he came to live on the property, erected
by a previous Van Borsum claimant or by the Rutgers
to delimit their property to its north.
Finally, it is possible there was a fence along the
patent boundary earlier in the eighteenth century,
although none is depicted on any map. In 1723, Jacobus Kip, one of the heirs to the Van Borsum patent, petitioned the Common Council to assist him
in surveying the property (New York City Common
Council 1905:3:335). It is at least possible that he
was successful in having the bounds of his land
surveyed and then erected a fence to separate it from
the Calk Hook Farm.
There is little doubt that the northern portion of
the excavated cemetery was used differently than
Figure 46. Site features and burials, African Burial Ground archaeological excavation (prepared for the United States General Services Administration).
Chapter 4. Relative Dating 89

the portion south of the fence line. Interments in the
northern area are sparse compared to the southern
area, where intensive use and reuse resulted in a dense
concentration of graves (see Figure7, pocket map).
Other distinctions of the northern area include a higher
frequency of domestic refuse in the soil matrix, evidence for a higher frequency of weedy plants, a more
regular and more southerly orientation of burials, and
the presence of most of the sites coffinless graves.
The domestic refuse that found its way into northern
grave shafts includes ceramics that were common from
the seventeenth century on, suggesting the northern
area was used more than the south for scattered refuse
disposal. There is also a slightly higher incidence of
weedy taxaaster relatives, goosefoot relatives, and
chicory relativesfrom analyzed burials in the northern portion of the excavated site (see AppendixG,
Part3 of this volume). There is no similar increase in
ragweed type, suggesting that the increases in the other
weedy types were not caused by cultivation or continuous soil disturbance. Noncultivated plants related to
asters, goosefoot, and chicory are waste-ground plants
and may reflect the use of landfill containing these
plants (see Chapter3 on the filling of the Calk Hook
lots) or perhaps the neglect of this property beginning
with the British occupation.
Divergent nonburial land use aside, north of the
fence line, the graves themselves are distinct. The
scarcity of burials in the northern area allows regularities in the horizontal placement of graves to emerge
so that it is possible to discern rows oriented roughly
north-south, probably along contours in the hillside.
In addition, at least in the western half of the northern area, graves are angled fairly uniformly south of
grid west; burial orientation in the area south of the
posthole alignment is much more variable (see Chapter5 for a discussion of burial orientation). Finally,
21graves without coffins were located clearly to the
north of the fence line, out of the 32coffinless graves
at the site (see Figure46). Put another way, 33percent
of the burials that were clearly to the north of the line
were without coffins, compared to only 4percent of
those clearly south of the line.
If we thus accept that the northern area represents
a distinct pattern of use, the question arises as to how
the burials to the north of the posthole alignment
are related temporally to fences. Were these burials
interred:
before any fence was built, in which case interments
were made in the area for a brief time (given their
relative sparsity) early on and subsequently were

restricted to the area of the Van Borsum patent to
the south;
prior to the Teller phase, but while an earlier fence
(possibly as early as 1723, and depicted in 1755)
was standing and thus deliberately outside the main
cemetery;
during Tellers tenure, and thus deliberately outside
the gated cemetery for which a fee was charged (ca.
17661776); or
after the British destroyed the fence (i.e., during
the occupation and after the war, 1776 through the
development of the lots and the effective closing
of the African Burial Ground)?
Artifact analysis, discussed in the section Artifact
Dating, indicates that at least some of the northern
burials postdate 1760. As the low density of burials
suggests a limited period of use for the northern area,
it is most likely datable to either the Teller phase or
the post-1776 phase, or possibly to both. We believe
the post-1776 hypothesis is best supported by the
evidence, as discussed in the section titled Results
of Analysis: The Temporal Grouping of Burials and
in Chapter9.
The Ditches
Physical boundaries may also be created by ditches.
There were three southwest-northwest-trending ditches
recorded archaeologically within Lot12 (see Figure46). According to Cheek (2003:Chapter4) the fill
in the ditches has been dated: the two northernmost
contained material from the 1760s and later, and
the southern ditch yielded artifact types from the
1780s and later. Cheek has mentioned several possible
functions for the trenches, from drainage features,
to dumping features, to boundary ditches or fencepost trenches. The northern ditch feature was some
910feet wide and the middle one was 34feet wide;
each was 2.53feet deep. In cross section, the middle
ditch had a straight northern side, such as would be
found in a ha-ha, a landscape feature meant to keep
animals out of gardens. The southernmost ditch was
77.5feet wide and shallowjust 1.52feet deep
and it appears to have been open for a longer period
of time than the others, based on its fill layers.
If one or more of the ditches functioned as a cemetery boundary, this would mean that during the period
when the interments located northward of the fence
Figure 47. Burials in the vicinity of the tannery dump in the northern part of the excavated site. Burials with significant cow hoof, horn,
and bone material in the grave shaft are indicated with large dots.
line were being conducted, either the cemeterys users

or its putative property owners saw fit to mark its
extent or perhaps to protect it from grazing animals.
No burials were located to the north of the southernmost trench within Lot12. However, the alignment of
this trench, if projected northeastward beyond Lot12,
falls within areas of the site that were not excavated,
so it is not possible to determine whether any graves
were located outside it.1 As Cheek has pointed out,
the southernmost trench feature is the most likely
candidate for a cemetery boundary. It is doubtful
that any of the ditches represent an early, pre-fence
boundary, as there is no evidence that early burials
extend this far north.
Another possibility is that the trenches mark edges
of or beds of roadways or paths that once led from
Broadway eastward to the pottery kiln(s) located near
the Little Collect Pond (see maps in Chapter2).
Cheek (2003:Chapter4) has suggested that there were burials north
of the alignment, but this is not apparent from the site mapping.
1
Animal-Bone Dumping
The frequency of animal bone and horn in grave
shafts and in other excavated features (for the latter,
see Cheek [2003]) has been plotted over space, and it
seems clear that within one area of the sitebetween
grid coordinates 135 and 195East to the north of
the fence linedumping of animal bone took place
at some period (Figure47). The faunal remains in
the dump include high relative frequencies of horn,
hooves, etc., suggesting that this subarea was used
for waste from tannery operations (see AppendixE,
Part3 of this volume). However, within this subarea,
there are some interspersed graves with little or no
animal bone.
It is possible that the dumping area was very irregular, so that its edge might fall between adjacent graves.
But another reasonable explanation for the pattern of
presence-absence is that some of the burials here predated the bone dump, although others were dug into it,
with the animal bones then back-filled into their grave

shafts. For this small part of the site, then, it may be
possible to date graves relative to one another according to the presence or absence of animal remains. If
the dump represents a single event or a brief period
of time, the interval of time between burials with and
without bone may be small. The burials within the
dump are discussed further in Chapter9.
Pottery-Waste Dumping
Stoneware pottery manufacturers were located immediately adjacent to the excavated portion of the cemetery from the 1730s on, and for at least part of the
period, these industries used the area of the cemetery
for dumping kiln waste (broken stoneware vessels,
clay waste, and kiln furnituresee AppendixF, Part3
of this volume). The ceramic material would have
lain on the surface of the ground or in shallow pits.
When graves were dug in these locations, the sherds
were back-filled into the graves. Thus we hypothesize
that in the areas where ceramics were ubiquitous
(i.e.,the dump areas), any grave shaft that did not
contain these materials probably predated the dump.
In addition to the stoneware operations, earthenware
was being produced by the Campbell pottery, located
just across Broadway from Block184, during the
eighteenth century. Redware waste sherds from this
pottery were also scattered over the ground, although
not concentrated in defined dumping areas.
Kiln waste was concentrated in the southeastern
area of the excavated cemetery. The material may have
been from either or both of the kilns that stood nearby
(one to the southeast and one closer by, near Duane
Street). It should be remembered that the northeastern
part of Block154 was never fully excavated and may
have contained pottery middens as well. A particularly
dense dump, which appears to have been on the surface rather than in an excavated pit, was designated
Feature139 during fieldwork. It covered an irregular
area that overlapped with several burials. A scatter of
stoneware waste sherds and discarded kiln furniture
came to be spread over a much larger area, however.
Such material was recovered from grave shafts at
the far west end of the site, although concentrations
drop off markedly to the west of the 200East grid
line. (It is likely at least some of the stoneware sherds
recovered were from vessels that were in use, rather
than kiln wasters.)
The commencement of the stoneware operation
on Pot Bakers Hill (in the southeast part of the Van
Borsum patent and to the southeast of the excavated
site) can be placed as early as 1728, when it appeared on

the Lyne survey (see Figures15 and 16 in Chapter 2).
William Crolius, the presumed proprietor of the works,
was registered in the city as a potter in 1728, although
he had immigrated here by 1718 (see Janowitz and
Cheek 2003). The second, northern kiln, associated with
Crolius and/or Remmey, may date to somewhat later,
probably ca.1740 (it was depicted on the Grim map,
which was drawn in 1804 but represents 17421744,
and appeared on contemporary maps by the 1750s).
We do not know, however, when the potters dumped
kiln-waste material in the archaeologically excavated
portion of the African Burial Ground. Analysis of the
ceramic materials themselves suggests that very few
kiln firings, perhaps even just one, are represented
by the most concentrated dump (Feature139; see
AppendixF, Part3 of this volume). This analysis also
indicates that the wares at the New York African Burial
Ground are dissimilar to those from other New York
sites that date to after the Revolution. We consider
it likely the dumping would have stopped during
the period when Teller fenced the land. Therefore,
we date the stoneware kiln dump to somewhere in
the period from ca.1728 to ca.1765. Some burials
in the southeast subarea of the excavated cemetery
are clearly datable to after the dumping began, since
they were placed in the middle of the midden and
their shafts were literally filled with sherds and kiln
furniture. Others, with smaller amounts of stoneware
waste in the shaft fill, were located outside the edge
of the dense midden. In some cases, burials with little
or no ceramic waste are thought to have been interred
prior to the time of the heavy dumping.
The Campbell earthenware manufactory on Broadway, which produced redware vessels and pantiles
(roofing tiles), probably commenced operation in
the late 1750s (John Campbell first appears in the
records as a potter at age 20 in 1759 [see Ketchum
1987:4243]). Frequencies of redwares in grave shafts
are low, however, and no localized dump area similar
to those for stoneware or animal waste can be mapped
within the excavated cemetery.2 Dumping seems to
have occurred within Lot12 to the north of the graveyard, and the only burial with a high frequency of redware, Burial313, is the northernmost excavated burial
at the site. This burial can confidently be placed in time
after the beginning of redware manufacture. Otherwise,
only the presence of redware kiln furniture, pantiles, or
A nonburial feature in Lot12, dated to the period 17601780, was
filled with redware kiln debris (Cheek 2003).
2

kiln wasters can be used to place burials in the second
half of the eighteenth century, and there are very few
with such items in their shafts: Burials185, 186, 213,
217, 242, 266, 276, 323, and 354.3 The absence of
redware kiln items cannot be used as a terminus ante
quem (TAQ), the date before which deposition must
have occurred, to place burials in the first half of the
century, because overall frequency is so low.
Artifact Dating
Where possible, artifacts found in direct association
with skeletal remains or coffins as well as artifacts
from the grave-shaft fill have been used to assign a
terminus post quem (TPQ), the date after which deposition must have occurred, for a burial. A grave that,
based on superposition, clearly postdated a burial with
dated artifacts was given that burials TPQ (unless it
had a later one of its own). It should also be remembered that if an interment cut into an earlier grave, an
item that was recovered along with the later burial
might actually have come from the earlier grave shaft.
Because there is no way of determining when such
mixing occurred, however, such items can only provide a TPQ for the later burial. Most of the graves that
were disturbed as a result of construction activities,
either historically or recently, have not been assigned
TPQs owing to the likely presence of intrusive material. Artifact-based TPQs are listed in Table13.
Stoneware and redware kiln furniture have not
been used as datable types in this analysis; the wares,
which in themselves have wide time ranges, have
instead been used as time-markers for the dumping
from local potteries, which we choose to keep as a
separate variable.
Because so many burials contained no datable
items at all, and most datable artifacts from the New
York African Burial Ground have very broad manufacture dates, only a few burials can be assigned to
temporal periods on the basis of datable items alone.
However, when combined with data on coffin shape,
stratigraphic sequence, and relationships to other site
features, the artifacts are helpful in developing the
chronology.
Many grave shafts contained artifacts that were first
manufactured in the seventeenth century (e.g.,slipRedware sherds identified as fragments of dishes, pots, or bowls that
may represent domestic refuse rather than kiln waste are not taken as
proof the pottery was in operation at the time of their deposition.
3
ware or white delft) and are devoid of items that

are clearly of later manufacture. However, over the
southern part of the excavated cemetery, the distribution of artifacts overall was very sparse, and it is
likely the absence of later artifacts reflects a relatively
clean surface. When evaluating domestic sites, the
absence of artifact types that were ubiquitous can be
used to assign TAQs (dates before which depositional
events occurred, in other words, latest likely dates)
for archaeological deposits. However, artifact types,
especially ceramics, which are typically ubiquitous
on sites with domestic components, cannot be used
in this way at the New York African Burial Ground.
Although dwellings stood adjacent to the cemetery
during the eighteenth century, associated domestic
refuse may not have been quickly scattered over the
area of the excavated interments. Thus the absence
of creamware, a type imported in quantity in the
1760s, cannot be taken to mean that a burial predated
that decade (although the presence of creamware, of
course, indicates that the burial cannot have been
made prior to its importation). Nor can the presence
of creamware and the absence of pearlware bracket a
burial within the 1760s1770s period, because there
is no reason to expect pieces of ceramic to be present
in the first place. If crockery were being deliberately
placed on the surfaces of graves, as has been documented at African American cemeteries elsewhere,
the presence/absence of datable types might be useful
for dating. There is no evidence from the New York
African Burial Ground for this practice, as on most
of the site the original surface was not present or had
been mechanically stripped (for a possible instance of
crockery placed on a coffin lid, see Chapter14). The
items providing the early TPQs listed in Table13for
the most part ceramic typesall may have been in
use well into the eighteenth century and, in some
cases, were still being manufactured. The fact that
the graves in which they were found contained no
items manufactured later does not mean that they
were early interments, although it does raise that
possibility. In fact, graves believed to be the earliest in our sample based on other criteria typically
contained no datable artifacts at all in the grave fill,
which suggests to us that the ground was clean in
the early years and acquired a sparse accumulation
of refuse material over time. It should also be noted
that there were 16burials that we believe to be later
than 1776 (based on other criteria) whose only graveshaft artifacts were of types manufactured beginning
between 1640 and 1744.

Table 13. Artifact-Based Termini Post Quem
Terminus Post Quem
Artifact
1640
plain white delft
191
1660
Chinese export
192, 402
1670
slipware
1680
Burial No.
9, 50, 57, 60, 67, 171, 194, 245, 414
light-blue painted delft 37, 63, 72, 158, 180
1720
white salt glaze
1727
coin
1740
agate ware
4A
1740
pipe
217
1740
Whieldon ware
297
1744
scratch blue
1750
25, 35, 55, 205, 268, 276, 278, 286, 419

214, 259
135, 328, 366, 379
Fazackerly palette delft 5, 30
1760
creamware
40, 172, 196, 224, 228, 236, 242, 266, 313, 323, 333,
337, 354, 362, 413
ca. 1760
iron tacks
101, 176
ca. 1770
buttons
1780
pearlware
6
1, 12, 14, 204, 207, 208, 241, 257
Items placed directly with the deceased (as opposed

to being mixed into the shaft fill) also cannot be used
to assign any date other than the TPQ. In the case of
the New York African Burial Ground, items placed
with or worn by the deceased included such things
as beads datable only broadly to the seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries, numerous buttons with broad
manufacture dates, a pipe datable only broadly to the
eighteenth century, and so forth. Fortunately, some
items (buttons and coins) do have beginning manufacture dates that fall within the eighteenth century,
and these, along with similarly datable grave-shaft
material, can be used to place some burials more
precisely in time.
Burial Stratigraphy and

Spatial Patterning
Superimposed burials provide an opportunity to
sequence interments from earlier to later, even without
being able to date them. All burials that overlapped
with others were organized into series, arbitrarily
numbered groups for which stratigraphic relationships could be examined. It is important to emphasize that the series we used for relative sequencing
do not necessarily or even typically reflect clustered

or related burials, terms which refer to burials that
may have been intentionally placed in relation to
each other. Many of the series included only a pair
of overlapping burials, whereas a few, in the more
densely occupied areas of the cemetery, consisted of
20 or more graves. The term isolates was used to
refer to burials that do not overlap with any others,
and again, it is emphasized that a stratigraphically
isolated burial was not necessarily spatially or socially
isolated from others.
The relative positioning of overlapping burials
within a series was reconstructed through analysis
of field notes, drawings, site maps, and photographs.
All recorded depths had to be converted to absolute
elevations. Sometimes the order of interment was
apparent upon first examination, especially when just
two or three burials were involved, but in the more
complex cases, the sequence often had to be derived
from multiple lines of evidence. Although individual
burial drawings are in the main excellent, stratigraphic
relationships were only occasionally shown, with each
burial recorded as though in isolation. A series of field
maps, created during the excavations by tracing or
transposing burial or coffin drawings cumulatively
onto larger sheets (at a scale of 1inch to 1foot),
Figure 48. Examples of diagrammed stratigraphic series. The positions of the rectangles represent the relative positions of the burials
(to the extent possible in a two-dimensional diagram).
was very helpful but not always conclusive as to

the sequence of superposition of the most crowded
burials. There are also a few maps drawn prior to
the excavation of graves within excavation shelters,
which sometimes clarify relationships, but these exist
only for a few locations. The field notes, which were
recorded burial by burial, rarely directly address issues
of stratigraphic relationships to other burials, and the
descriptions of grave-shaft and overlying, underlying,
and surrounding soils are somewhat sporadic. As is
always the case when analyzing a site subsequent to
the actual fieldwork, much time and effort had to be
spent reconstructing the archaeological excavation
before the virtual reconstruction of the original site
could begin.
Reconstructed stratigraphic relationships were diagramed for ease of analysis. Examples are reproduced
in Figure48, and the full set is in AppendixI, Part3
of this volume, along with a list of the burials in each
series analyzed. Prose descriptions of the stratigraphic
relationships of each burial are provided in Part2 of
this volume.
The earlier than, later than order of interment

arrived at through the stratigraphic and site map
analysis does not, of course, provide information
regarding the span of time involved overall or the
intervening time between individual burials, and
much less regarding the absolute date of any interment. Inferences have been made for specific types
of stratigraphic sequences, however: In cases where a
later burial actually truncated an earlier onethat is,
destroyed all or part of the prior burialit is hypothesized that a relatively lengthy period intervened
between the two. This is predicated on the assumption that the later interment in these cases showed
a disregard for the earlier, either because the grave
diggers had no knowledge of, or no concern for the
preservation of, an existing grave. The truncation of
one grave by another is not, in fact, all that common
at the New York African Burial Ground, even though
there are locations where burials are quite densely
crowded.
The task of placing burials in temporal groups is
complicated by a practice we believe to have been

common at the cemetery, the placement of young
children within, above, or in close proximity to adult
graves (see discussion in Chapter5). We recognize
our own bias toward assigning child burials to the
same temporal groups as the adults but do not have a
means to straightforwardly correct it.4
There is one group of cases where the elapsed time
between a later disturbance and a burial or between
superimposed burials can be better estimated. The
degree of disarticulation of the disturbed burial can
suggest how long it was in the ground before it was
displaced. Sometimes it is clear that the remains were
fully disarticulated prior to the disturbance, as bones
were either placed in a neat pile or scattered. In these
cases, the minimum length of time necessary for full
fleshy decomposition provides a minimum interval between events. This interval may have been
approximately 23years, although coffins, shrouds,
and clothing may have reduced the decomposition
rate somewhat (Rodriguez 1997:460461).5
In other cases, the span of time encompassed by a
stratigraphic sequence can be deduced only with reference to other factors, such as spatial considerations
(e.g.,apparent groups or rows) or to independent
variables such as TPQs or relationships to other site
features. Likewise, isolates can be temporally related
to other burials only by reference to such variables.
In this type of analysis, the danger of tautology must
always be avoided: another variable can provide a
hypothesized date range for one or more of the members of a stratigraphic series, but only if stratigraphic
position has not been used to assign a date range to
that variable. However, if stratigraphic position tends
to co-vary with another trait, such as coffin shape or
the nature of grave-fill contents, then chronological distinctions are strengthened, and periodization
becomes more feasible.
One factor that must be examined in relation to
stratigraphyand especially to the assignment of
isolates to stratais elevation. Sitewide, absolute
elevation itself cannot be used to determine earlier
and later burials. This is because the original ground
This bias is apparent when we look at the child/adult ratios for each
temporal group (see Chapter5)
4
Sometimes a later action displaced bones from an earlier burial, but

some of the earlier bones remained articulated. Research at ossuary
sites has lead to the development of a sequence for skeletal element
disarticulation, which helps us to recognize that remains that were
displaced from their original burial position might display partial
articulation (Ubelaker 1974:2831).
5
surface of the cemetery sloped downward from the

west, near Broadway, to the east, near the Collect
Pond (see Chapter3). Thus, most of the westernmost burials were originally at higher elevations
than those in the eastern part of the site. It is only
within limited areas that absolute elevation might
be a clue as to sequence of interment. However,
even this would presume that the ground surface in
any given location remained constant over the life
of the cemetery. Such a presumption is untenable.
In fact, there is evidence that the ground surface in
some places eroded away in the interval between
interments, although in other areas, it was raised.
Given the uneven terrain, it is likely that the hillsides
eroded and the flatter areas came to be covered over
as the seasons passed. Hence, there are instances, not
infrequent, where a burial has clearly been damaged
by a later burial, but the earlier of the two has a higher
cranial elevation than the later (e.g., Series10, in
Figure48). This indicates that an isolate burial cannot simply be placed temporally with others nearby
that have similar elevations. Instead, its alignment,
soil description, grave-fill contents, and any other
available evidence must be considered. In many
cases, it was necessary to simply leave isolates in
the default Middle Group.
It should also be remembered that the depth below
the ground surface of even the uppermost burials cannot be reconstructed in most cases. This is because
a ground surface was intact in only one small area
of the site, the western end of Republican Alley (see
Chapter3). Thus the depths of grave shafts relative
to shifting surfaces cannot be used to gauge the likelihood that interments were from the same period.
Where the ground surface was recorded, grave shafts
apparently were no more than 2.53 feet deep. It
may be possible through further analysis, using this
depth as the norm, to postulate changes in the ground
surface at various locations in the cemetery where
burials overlap.
The inability to use absolute elevation to reconstruct relative chronology does not mean that the use
of the higher part of the cemetery and the use of the
lower part coincided. In fact, one or the other area
may have been used first, and there are good historical arguments for either scenario. One or more other
time-sensitive variables would have to covary with
east-west coordinates in order to begin to test which
area saw earliest use. No such covariance has been
discerned in the data thus far.
Figure 49. Coffin shapes represented at the African

Burial Ground.
Coffin Shape
The New York African Burial Ground sample includes
four-sided tapering, rectangular, and shouldered or
hexagonal6 shaped, coffins (Figure49). From the
outset, we considered the possibility that this variability is temporally diagnostic. The documentary
and material record for change over time in coffin
shape is confusing, but in general, a change from
four-sided tapering coffins to the shouldered variety
is supported (coffins are discussed in Chapter10).
The preponderance of stratigraphic relationships at
the New York African Burial Ground point to this
sequence. The issue is complicated because of the
large number of infants and young children interred
here. It is very clear on the basis of burial stratigraphy
and other dating factors that many very small coffins
were made in the four-sided shapes (tapered or rectangular) throughout the period that the cemetery was
in use. Only the full-sized coffins were therefore
considered candidates for temporal sequencing.
Four-sided adult coffins at the cemetery were of two
types, those that tapered toward the foot and those that
were rectangular. Initially, both were grouped together
as possible indicators of early burials. Subsequently,
stratigraphic and artifact analysis produced contradictory evidence for this, and the rectangular-shaped, fullThe term hexagonal was used throughout the analysis and in the
database but is perhaps technically a misnomer. The angled shoulder
of these coffins was formed by bending a single side board and can
be slight or pronounced. See Chapter10.
6
sized coffinfound in any case in only two burialsis

now considered to be nondiagnostic.
There is evidence that four-sided tapered and hexagonal coffins overlapped in time at the New York
African Burial Ground. However, the tapered coffin
type appears to provide the greatest degree of confidence for generating an early analytical cohort (see
discussion of the Early Group in Results of Analysis:
The Temporal Grouping of Burials).
Attempted seriation of coffins based on other characteristics, such as size, material, and construction
details, has not been fruitful. None of the basic parameters of variation other than shape appear to be time
sensitive. One possible instance of change over time
is decreased use of spruce, but the sample number is
too small for confidence. See Chapter10 for detailed
data on New York African Burial Ground coffins.
Results of Analysis: The Temporal

Grouping of Burials
The assignment of burials to temporal groups is
presented in Figure50a50d and Chapters69. A
complete list of burials that includes temporal assignments is in AppendixC, Part3 of this volume; the
burial descriptions in Part2 of this volume include
the temporal group assignments and the supporting evidence where appropriate. The Early Group
and the Late Group are derived based on the analyses described previously in this chapter. The Middle
Figure 50b. Western-central area, African Burial Ground excavation (prepared for the United States General Services Administration).
Figure 50c. East-central and Lot 18 areas, African Burial Ground excavation (prepared for the United States General Services Administration).
Figure 50d. Eastern area, African Burial Ground excavation (prepared for the United States General Services Administration).
Groups comprise all remaining burialsthe majority
of those excavated at the New York African Burial
Groundand within it a Late-Middle component is
identified based on stratigraphic relationships and,
in some cases, artifact dating. It is likely the Middle
Group overlaps at one end with Early Group burials
and that the Late-Middle Group overlaps in time with
the Late Group. It is emphasized that no burials are
dated absolutely. In the following discussion we first
address the Late and Early Groups, which are most
clearly defined.
The Late Group

The Late Group (114graves) was first postulated on
the basis of burials spatial and stratigraphic relationship to the posthole alignment that is believed to
represent the Calk Hook FarmVan Borsum patent
boundary. Eight of the northern-area burials have
TPQs of ca.1760 (creamware in the shafts). Two
have TPQs of ca.1780 (pearlware in the shafts; see
Table13). It is posited on the basis of this and spatial
patterning (i.e.,relatively sparse burial distribution),
that this area was in use relatively late in the life of the
cemetery. But was it a 3040-year span encompassing
the Teller and postwar periods, or was it a shorter span
limited to one or the other period?
Possible evidence for the use of the northern area
during the Teller phase, 17651776, includes the presence of most of the coffinless burials in the area. Those
who buried their dead north of the fence may have
included people unable to pay the fee that Teller
was supposedly charging and who, by extension, also
may have been unable to afford coffins.
Three kinds of evidence argue against the correlation of burial-without-coffin and Tellers imposed
fees. For one thing, there are coffinless burials in
which the deceased were interred with objects of
value, suggesting that those without coffins were not
necessarily the poorest of the cemeterys population.
Forty-five burials had items of clothing or jewelry
(discounting problematic associations as discussed
in Chapters12 and 13)6 of these were among
the 32coffinless burials. These 6 include 2 with
enameled cuff link or button faces and 1 with a set
of matching gilt cuff links. It does not appear likely
that extreme impoverishment correlates directly with
coffinless burial, although we note the small numbers
in the sample. Second, in at least one case, there is
an apparent north-south row of coffinless burials
(Burials223, 150, 199, and 211, approximately at
grid line 75East) that spans the fence-post alignment, suggesting that this type of interment was
being conducted at a time when the fence was not
standing (and thus no fees were being extorted by
Teller). Finally, there is the simple fact that throughout the course of the cemeterys use, most African
New Yorkers buried there were very poor, yet their
survivors almost always managed to provide a coffin, either through the household head (the master
in the parlance of the time) or through contributions
from kin and community. The provision of a coffin,
we argue, was likely considered one of the very basic
components of a proper burial (see Chapters5 and
10). Why then, would poverty be marked by lack of
coffins only during the Teller phase? It is possible,
and perhaps likely, that the frequency of coffinless
interments north of the fence line has an explanation
other than a purely economic one.
There is some circumstantial historical evidence
for the use of the northern area only after 1776. Why,
we might ask, would the Rutgers/Barclay family
(proprietors of the Calk Hook land) allow burials on
their property in the 1760s? They had leased out some
of this property (apparently to potteries and a potash
manufacturer), and structures stood on it adjacent to
the burial ground. During the occupation, however,
property boundaries were more easily ignored, and
proprietors were subject to encroachment with little
legal recourse. With the destruction of the fence, the
Calk Hook property may have lain open for usurpation by cemetery users. It is possible, too, that British
use of the southern part of the cemetery for barracks
and other military uses and for burying its army dead
and prisoners (see Chapter2) effectively pushed
the African Burial Ground northward. The animalbone dump identified north of the fence also may be
evidence that this part of the Calk Hook property was
encroached upon during and after the war.
In summary, the burials to the north of the alignment of the patent boundary are assigned to the late
cohort within the cemetery population. The actual
time periodafter ca. 1765 or after 1776is not
certain, although there are historical reasons to select
the later date. In brief, the presence of most coffinless
burials to the north of the fence line can be linked to
its use during the British occupation of New York.
Demographic evidence supports this dating, a point
taken up in Chapter9.
In three cases, northern burials were truncated by
other interments, and the bones were redeposited in
such a way as to prove that they were completely

defleshed by the time of the second interment. These
cases are Burials76, 185, and 193. We do not know
the precise length of time it would have taken for
the bones to be completely disarticulated. All three
were without coffins, which may have led to quicker
decomposition.7 Assuming the northern area became
available for burials in 1776 and was in use through
at least 1787, the interval between superimposed
burials could have been a maximum of 11 years.
Decomposition may have taken only 23years, so
the assignment of even the disturbed burials to the
Late Group is justified.
It is assumed that burials continued south of the
fence line during the time the northern area was used,
as there is no evidence (archaeological or historical)
to indicate they did not. Those burials to the south of
the fence line that have been placed in the Late Group
have been assigned on the basis of stratigraphy, spatial
alignment, and artifacts. There are a number of burials,
notably toward the western end of the excavated site,
whose elevations are considerably higher than others
in the immediate area. It appears the area saw a last
phase of use after earlier graves had been covered
over, possibly owing to development on Broadway.
As noted, there are some cases where a row of
interments appears to span the line of fence posts.
Some such rows include burials whose grave shafts
cut into postholes and thus clearly postdate at least
one fence. Rows, of course, may include both pre- and
post-fence burials, but where other factors suggest a
burial is relatively late (e.g.,it overlay several others),
its location in a row with northern ones can support
the dating.
The Early Group

We have seen that artifacts can provide dates after
which burials must have taken place, but the lack of
datable artifacts in most burials makes it impossible to
know the earliest possible dates of interment. Analysis
of coffin shape, stratigraphy, and relationships to the
pottery dump, however, has led to the generation of
an early grouping of burials consisting of 51graves,
although 8 of these are considered only probable.

The hypothesis that four-sided coffins at the New
York African Burial Ground were earlier than hexagonal coffins (see Chapter10) was tested by examining
stratigraphic relationships. In 26cases, graves containing four-sided adult coffins were overlain or cut into
by other graves, and in 10cases, four-sided coffins
were actually thoroughly truncated by later graves
(see AppendixI in Part3 of this volume). Five burials
with four-sided coffins were isolates, and one was an
isolate except for a co-interred child burial. Only three
graves with four-sided coffins, Burials207, 392, and
possibly 388, overlay other burials.
Burial207, an adult grave with a tapered coffin,
overlay numerous child and infant burials. Cleaning
of the cranium of Burial207 in the laboratory yielded
a tiny piece of hand-painted pearlware, datable to
the 1780s or later. Based on this sherd, which probably was in the soil matrix at the time of the original
interment, Burial207 appears to be a Late Group
interment.8
The burials with four-sided coffins were also examined in relation to other site features. None appears
north of the fence line. Burials with four-sided coffins
in the area of the stoneware dump were next examined. The grave shaft of one with a rectangular coffin,
Burial333, contained massive amounts of stoneware
waste (from Feature139) and thus had to be placed
later in time than the kiln dumping. It also contained
a piece of creamware (dating it to after ca.1760).
However, other four-sided-coffin burials within the
vicinity of the dense kiln dump contained only small
quantities of ceramic waste material relative to the
midden density and no other temporally diagnostic
artifacts. These included Burial340, an isolate burial
with a tapered coffin, which had no stoneware in its
grave shaft. The grave was located just to the south
of Feature 139 and therefore outside the concentrated
dump. However, it seems highly unlikely that no
sherds would have found their way into the grave
shaft if the dump was already in place here when the
woman in Burial340 was interred (shafts of other
For purposes of the chronological analyses in Chapters69, Burial207
has been placed with the later group. There were disturbances in the
immediate area, including the area above this burial. Because the sherd
of pearlware was actually in the cranium, however, it seems prudent
to assume it was not intrusive. If we were to consider it as intrusive
and place Burial 207 with the Early Group, then all of the underlying
subadult interments would also need to be assigned to the Early Group.
This reassignment would substantively alter the demographics of the
earlier group. See Chapter6 for further discussion.
8
Burial185 definitely was interred after the period of animal-bone

dumping, and there was much animal bone in its shaft fill. The waste
material in the soil may have affected taphonomic conditions for
Burial185, causing an even speedier decomposition of the flesh. The
presence of tanning materials, such as leather scrap and tree bark,
would have increased preservation of flesh, but there is no reason to
believe such materials accompanied the animal bones to the dump
(Rodriguez 1997:463).
7
burials near the edges of the dump contained at least
some stoneware).
Burials387 and 389 had four-sided, tapered coffins
and were located beneath burials with hexagonal coffins. They contained some ceramic waste but nowhere
near as much as their respective overlying burials or
the midden itself. The field records are not specific
as to where sherds were recovered within a given
grave, but there is a possibility that the ceramics in
these two burials came from the intruding later graves.
Yet another grave with a four-sided, tapered coffin,
Burial388, contained much more kiln waste (over
400pieces) than did Burials387 and 389. Although
Burial388 did not have a later burial intruding into
it, the area surrounding and overlying the grave was
disturbed, so the possibility that the ceramics were
intrusive cannot be ruled out. If the ceramics in their
shafts were not intrusive, these burials suggest that the
midden was formed during a time when four-sided,
tapered coffins were still in use. In this case, the lowered frequencies of stonewares in these graves may be
due to the fact that their grave shafts were truncated,
and thus the sheer amount of fill sampled was greatly
reduced, and/or to the fact that they were located at
the edges of the dense midden feature.
Burial333 was distinct from all of the other burials
with four-sided coffins in the southeast area of the site
because of the huge amount of stoneware waste material in its shaft fill (over 3,000pieces) and the TPQ
of ca.1760. Because of this, we wondered whether
rectangular coffins should be grouped together with
tapered ones or considered separately as temporal indicators. One other clearly rectangular adult coffin, that
of Burial392, appears to be a later burial and, in fact,
overlay a burial with a tapering coffin. Burial432, also
located in the southeastern part of the excavation (not
far from Burial333), also had an apparently rectangular coffin. Unfortunately, it was not fully excavated,
and there is no record of material from the grave with
which to independently date the burial. Also, because
excavation was incomplete, the assignment of the coffin shape should be considered tentative.
If we tentatively identify tapering coffins as early,
it does not follow that graves with six-sided coffins
are all later than all of those with tapered coffins. It
seems likely that for a number of years, both styles
would have been in use. Adjacent to the area of the
dense stoneware midden, there was one intact burial
(Burial384) with a hexagonal coffin but no stoneware at all in the grave shaft. This burial may have
predated the midden; otherwise, we would expect at
least a few sherds to have found their way into the

grave shaft. In the excavated cemetery as a whole,
there were 94burials with hexagonal coffins from
which no stoneware was recovered. All of these except
Burial384, however, were located far away from the
midden (the closest was Burial351, about 80feet to
the west), and therefore the absence of the waste material cannot be used to place them earlier in time than
the dump. The graves with tapered adult coffins that
contained stoneware in their shafts included the burials mentioned above that were located immediately
adjacent to the midden and had later intrusions, as well
as two that were far from the midden, Burials404 and
416, both also disturbed by later interments.
Because there are tapering coffins in graves with
stoneware, and hexagonal coffins in graves without
it, we had to make a decision as to what to use as a
temporal diagnostic. We can use either coffin shape,
or the absence of stoneware, or a combination of both
factors to identify the earliest graves. The preponderance of spatial and stratigraphic evidence supports
the general use of four-sided, tapering adult coffins
to identify early burials (questionable assignments are
indicated in Chapter6). For the analysis in this report,
hexagonal coffins have been placed in the Middle
Group or later. Burial384 probably predated the midden, but it was still placed in the Middle Groupit
was probably among the earliest burials in that cohort,
however, and it may in fact have been contemporary
with adjacent Early Group Burial361.
In some cases, once the early adult burials were
identified, other burials could be grouped with them.
Child Burials121 and 226, for example, were cointerred with Burials202 and 221, respectively, and
therefore have been placed in the Early Group (see
Chapter6). In other cases, stratigraphic relationships
indicate early burials even where coffin shape is not
determinable owing to poor preservation.
The absolute dating of the early burial cohort is
problematic. There is no firm date for the stylistic
change to hexagonal coffins. The general absence of
pottery waste may provide a TAQ for the burials (a
date before which they must have been interred), but
we do not know when dumping began. Assuming
that the potteries were in operation by 1728 and that
they began dumping their waste on the burial ground
shortly thereafter (although this cannot be verified),
Early Group burials are probably pre-1730 and/or
from the very early period of the potteries.
Early burials are located in every area of the site
except north of the fence line. It is therefore posited

that there was no sequence of use from east to west
(or vice versa) within the portion of the African
Burial Ground excavated archaeologically. Although
this project appears to have exposed the latest portion of the historic cemetery, it may not have exposed
the earliest area used. There is no way to date the
earliest of the early burials excavated, although
a general assignment to the early decades of the
eighteenth century is safe, with the understanding
that earlier interments certainly may be included.
In terms of datable material, only a few sherds of
imported ceramics (delft and Chinese porcelain,
providing TPQs in the mid-seventeenth century)
were found in two of the Early Group burials; the
remaining burials contained no datable items other
than the local stoneware.
The Middle and Late-Middle Groups

Having identified an early burial cohort on the basis
of coffin shape, grave-shaft material, and stratigraphy, and a late cohort on the basis of artifact dating,
site location (north of the fence), and stratigraphic/
spatial relationships, the majority of burials (256
graves) was assigned by default to a main, middle
temporal group. These burials were then checked for
TPQ and analyzed stratigraphically to extract possible
earlier and later subsets. In the main, an adult burial
was assigned to the Late-Middle Group if it overlay
others and especially if it truncated another burial.
Child burials, more often than not found overlying
adults, were considered for inclusion in the Late-Mid-
dle Group if they truncated underlying interments, or

if they appeared to be associated with later adult burials, or, occasionally, if they were thought to be later
based on overall stratigraphy. The stratigraphic series
charts were used in assigning relative chronological
placements. Isolate Middle Group burials were more
difficult to assign and were placed in the Late-Middle
Group only if they appeared to be spatially related
to others (e.g.,aligned adjacent and parallel) or had
artifacts with beginning manufacture dates later than
ca. 1760. There are 58graves that have been assigned
to the Late-Middle Group.
It is emphasized that the Middle and Late-Middle
cohorts of burials are, as groups, more strictly relative than are the early and late cohorts. There may be
much overlap between the Middle and Late-Middle
Groups in the dates of individual interments. Likewise,
Late-Middle Group burials may overlap in time with
the Late Group. Although some variables, such as
orientation, and some artifact distributions show a
distinction or perhaps a trend occurring between the
two groupings, none is strong enough to be used as a
temporal indicator.
For some purposes, the Middle Group can be seen
as the main group rather than as a temporal cohort.
As it is presumed to include the broadest temporal
span of interments (with early and late graves included
inadvertently in the absence of temporal evidence), it
can serve as a proxy median or average sample in
terms of demography and material-culture distribution.
Thus, deviations from this average can be discerned
and examined.
Chapter 5
Overview of Mortuary Population, Burial

Practices, and Spatial Distribution
Warren R. Perry and Jean Howson
This chapter presents an overview of the archaeological evidence for population, burial practices, and
spatial arrangements at the New York African Burial
Ground. After providing a demographic profile of the
population whose graves were disinterred, we turn to
the overall evidence for burial practices, viewing the
evidence from the site as the physical signature of
the repeated performance of funerary ritual. Seven
material aspects of mortuary practice are examined:
coffins; grave orientation; body position; individual
and co-interment; burial attire, such as shrouds, winding sheets, and street clothes; adornment and other
goods in direct association with the deceased; and
grave marking. In subsequent chapters, we will look
sequentially at the four temporal groups of burials,
noting possible evidence for change over time. As
will be seen, however, continuity overshadows change
with regard to burial patterns.
The Mortuary Population

This section contains basic information on the age
and sex profile of the mortuary population. Demographic data based on analysis of the skeletal remains
are presented in Chapter7 of Skeletal Biology of the
New York African Burial Ground (Rankin-Hill etal.
2009). Here we provide basic information on the age
and sex distribution within the excavated sample as a
wholethe same information is presented for burials
in each temporal group in Chapters69.
Throughout this report, when referring to a specific
individual, age is given in terms of an age range, from
the lowest estimate to the highest estimate. However,
there are several other ways to refer to age. There
are three age categories: infant (6months old or
younger), subadult (under approximately 15years
of age), and adult (15years or older). This tripartite
division is used, for example, when distinguishing

between those who could be sexed using standard
metric parameters (adults) and those who could not
(subadults). A composite age was also derived for
each individual, a single number reflecting the statistical age based on numerous parameters measured.
For purposes of analysis, this age was used to assign
individuals to age groups, so that the demographic
distribution data can be presented more clearly and
so that counts would be sufficient to discern any patterning of traits (such as pathologies). Age groups
for subadults are in half-year increments for the first
year of life and thereafter in 1-year increments. Age
groups for adults are in 5-year increments. Age groups
are used in the age and sex distribution graphs here
(Figures51 and 52) and in Chapters69.
The individuals interred in the excavated portion
of the cemetery represent the entire life cycle (see
Figure52). Preservation of infants and childrens
remains was probably not as good as preservation
of adult remains, but the under-15cohort (n=157)
nevertheless represented 39percent of those for whom
at least an age category (if not an age range) could be
determined (n=402). Unlike the burial ground for
enslaved workers at Newton Plantation in Barbados
(Handler and Lange 1978:285287), the young were
interred along with the old in New Yorks African
cemetery.
Of adults (i.e.,those approximately 15 and over)
for whom sex could be determined, there were more
men than women (see Figure52). This demographic
may have to do with the area within the historic cemetery that was archaeologically excavated. As will be
discussed in Chapter9, the northernmost portion of the
burial ground may have been in use during the British
occupation of the city at the time of the Revolution,
and it is possible more men than women were buried
in that period. Additional discussion of the sex ratio
108 Warren R. Perry and Jean Howson
Figure 51. Age distribution. The white bars at the right indicate individuals for whom a more precise age could not be
determined.
Figure 52. Adult sex distribution. The adults represented in bars at the far right of the graph are
individuals identified as adults but for whom age could not be determined.
Chapter 5. Overview of Mortuary Population, Burial Practices, and Spatial Distribution 109
Figure 53. Left, in situ drawing of

Burial 226 atop Burial 221; and right,
in situ photograph, showing the scant
remains of the infant with a pin and
eight fired-glass beads that were worn
at the neck (drawing by M.Schur;
photograph by Dennis Seckler).
in relation to the mortuary population is provided in

Chapter13 of Skeletal Biology of the New York African
Burial Ground (Blakey, Rankin-Hill, etal. 2009).
Burial Practices
Figure53 illustrates several of the aspects of burial
practice that we discuss. The infant in Burial226
was interred in its own coffin, but within the grave
of Burial221, a man between the ages of 30 and 60.
The coffins were placed with the heads to the west.
The infant wore a strand of fired-glass beads that
were probably made in West Africa, and copperalloy straight pins apparently fastened the winding
cloth.
The use of individual coffins, the head-to-west
orientation, and shrouding are all typical of burials
within the excavated portion of the African Burial
Ground. On the other hand, the shared grave and
the adornment of the child with beads are unusual,
for most of those interred in the burial ground had
separate graves and lacked personal possessions or
adornment.
An extraordinary degree of homogeneity is found
in four parameters of potential variability examined
at the New York African Burial Ground. Coffin use,

body orientation with head to west, and extended
supine body position characterize the vast majority of
interments. The preference for individual interment is
also very evident, and even where graves were shared,
separate coffins were typically provided. It is also
very likely that shrouding was the prevailing practice,
although evidence of shroud fastenings in the form of
pins was present in only half the graves; those without
pins probably were wrapped. Variation emerges in
evidence for clothing, personal adornments, and other
items recovered in direct association with skeletal
remains, all of which were few and far between, and
their stylistic and material range was limited. It is not
possible to determine whether grave markers, which
were preserved in very few cases, were typical. The
spatial relationships among graves were variable, but
not strikingly so, as though a limited syntax guided
grave placement.
How do we explain the overall lack of variability
at the New York African Burial Ground? Poverty
can account for the limited presence of items placed
with the deceased. The sumptuary aspects of funerary
rituals and the disposition of the corpse, which might
have signaled differing ritual programs and beliefs,
were severely constrained. Other mortuary patterns

are more surprising. Given the diverse geographical
and ethnic origins of black New Yorkers during the
eighteenth century, why do we not see more variation
in a range of attributes?
The portion of the cemetery that was excavated
may represent only a portion of the community. As
we discussed in Chapter3, we believe the excavations
sampled only a small percentage of the graves in the
historic cemetery as a whole. The excavated sample
might represent only an ethnically or religiously distinct
segment of the African population. As the burials apparently span a long period of time, and because infusions
of captive Africans both from the continent and via the
Caribbean would have joined New Yorks black community periodically and sporadically during the eighteenth
century, it seems unlikely that the sample includes only
one distinct group. Still, this possibility should be kept
in mind, despite the lack of clear material evidence, such
as distinct burial positions or grave goods or a cross or
other religious insignia, to identify any specific ethnic
or religious group. We also lack documentary evidence.
Surviving church records, for example, do not provide
an adequate profile of the Christian affiliations of New
Yorks Africans, although to be sure, the Dutch Church
had black members from at least the 1640s, Elias Neau
drew blacks to his school beginning in 1704, and Methodists and Moravians counted black members later in
the century. Shipping records, which often cite only
Africa or Coast of Africa as points of origin, are
not specific enough to identify the ethnic groups that
were represented in the towns population (Medford,
Brown, Carrington, etal. 2009d:4849).
Another possibility is that the physical signature
we are examining represents aspects of funerary ritual
(i.e.,digging of individual graves, coffin use, or orientation) that were under the control of some sort of
management that would have proscribed ethnically
distinct types of graves. There is no documentary
evidence to suggest that the cemetery was ever regulated in this way. Grave diggers serving at the African
Burial Ground, however, may have influenced the
development of a general mortuary program.
Coffin Burial
There can be little doubt that black New Yorkers considered coffins as a sine qua non of a proper burial.
At the New York African Burial Ground, there were
385graves (some without extant human remains)
for which the presence or absence of a coffin could
be definitively determined. Of these graves, 353, or
91.6percent, had coffins.1 Coffins were provided

for all age categories (Table14). The use of a coffin
was the norm during most of the period represented
archaeologically in most of the cemetery, as seen on
Table 14. Presence or Absence of Coffins
Coffin
Subadult
Adult
Undetermined
Total
Present
152
186
15
353
Absent
31
32
the site plan (see Figure7, pocket map, and Figures

50a50d in Chapter 4). The wood used to make the
coffins was generally inexpensive cedar, pine, or fir.
Coffin hardware consisted almost exclusively of nails
(see Chapter10).
Considering the overwhelming frequency of coffins, it is worth exploring the possible circumstances
under which coffinless burials occurred. The adult
burials without coffins may reflect the inability of
the family of the deceased to afford a coffin or the
refusal of an enslaved persons household head to
provide it, it may be indicative of burial under some
kind of special circumstance, or it may represent a
distinctive burial custom. The spatial distribution of
burials without coffins is very skewed, as discussed
in Chapter4, as most were located in the northern
part of the excavated cemetery, and this points to an
explanation. We will further analyze the coffinless
burials, which appear to be from the latest period of
the cemeterys use, in Chapter9.
Head-to-West Orientation
A burial orientation with the head to the west seems
to have been one of the first mortuary practices
to become standardized in the African Diaspora
(Jamieson 1995:52). The New York African Burial
Ground bears this out. There were 375burials for
which the general orientation of the body can be determined. This includes cases where precise angle of orientation could not be measured owing to very partial
preservation but for which enough bones were in situ
At Newton Plantation cemetery in Barbados, another large burial
place for enslaved Africans that overlaps in time with the African
Burial Ground, only 29 of the 92excavated burials had coffins, a
much lower frequency (31percent). Disturbances to the Newton
burials made determination of presence/absence difficult, however
(Handler and Lange 1978:191, 231250). Coffin use at Elmina,
Ghana, on the Gold Coast, appears to belong to the nineteenth century
(DeCorse 2001:101).
1
Figure 54. Distribution of burials with heads oriented to the west at the African Burial Ground, by temporal group.
to determine general placement. Of these 375burials, 367, or 97.8percent, had the head in a westerly
direction. Figure54 summarizes information about
burials with heads oriented to the west for which the
angle of orientation could be measured in degrees
west of grid north.2
Although the most frequent head orientation is at
90 west of grid north, head orientation of head-towest burials ranged from 64 to 128 west of north.
Fully two-thirds were angled at greater than 90 west
of grid north, a skewing that can be seen on the site
maps in Figures 7 (pocket map) and 50a50d (in
Chapter 4) and in Chapters69. This southward trend
is most marked in the Late Group burials. Other orientations (not graphed) include head to east (n=4),
head to south (n=3), and head to north (n=1). These
are discussed further here and in Chapters69.
How was the orientation determined when a grave
shaft was dug and the coffin (or coffinless body) placed
in it? Obviously, cemetery users would have known
Grid north is based on the grid that was used for the field
excavations, which in turn in based on the alignment of the buildings
and streets surrounding the archaeological site. It is 30 east of
magnetic north. Burials for which the head can be presumed to have
been in a westerly direction, but which were too disturbed for exact
measurement of the angle, are not included in this figure. Comparative
archaeological examples are less uniform than orientations observed
at the New York African Burial Ground. The Newton cemetery had
58burials for which orientation could be determined, and of these,
38, or 65percent, had the head oriented to the west.
2
which way was west, but the variability within the

west-oriented graves is worth examining, especially
because the New York African Burial Ground offers a
unique opportunity to examine this kind of patterning.
Three possibilities were considered: (1)use of the path
of the sun, at sunset in particular; (2)use of landmarks
or physical features in the vicinity to orient burials;
(3)and alignment with neighboring graves.
Alignment to the Path of the Sun: Orientation
with reference to sunset would account for variability because the sun sets at different points on the
horizon over the course of the year (Figure55 and
Table15).3
The 90 west-of-grid-north position, the most frequent orientation, corresponds to the position of sunset
at either late May through mid-June or the first part
of July. A total of 45.5percent of burials are oriented
to where the sun would have set from about mid-May
to mid-August. The azimuth angle at the summer solstice is 87.59 west of our grid north (i.e.,very close
to our grid west). The burials oriented with the head
further southward (33percent) may correspond either
to February through April or to August through October (no burials were oriented extremely southward,
The source for this information is Gronbeck (1997). We used the
twenty-first of each month to calculate sunset. The azimuth angles
over the course of the year would not have changed noticeably over
the past 300years.
3
Figure 55. Position of the sun on the horizon at sunset in

lower Manhattan over the course of a year, relative to the
African Burial Ground site grid.
Table 15. Angle of Sunset for Each

Month of the Year
Month
Angle
(degrees)
January
145.98
February
133.27
March
119.02
April
103.48
May
92.14
June
87.59
July
91.78
August
103.26
September
118.53
October
133.58
November
144.48
December
150.90
Note: Degrees west of grid north, using the

twenty-first of each month.
where the sun set from approximately mid-November

through early February). The rest of the measurable
orientation angles fall northward of where the sun set
at the summer solstice.
The highest numbers of deaths among Europeans
in colonial New York tended to occur during the
disease season from August to October. Eighteenthcentury burial registers for New Yorks Reformed
Dutch Church and Trinity (Anglican) Church have

been tabulated by month as shown in Table16. The
peak death months overlap in both samples. The Dutch
Church data are probably most reliable because of the
large sample size.
Klepp (1994:478) has shown, however, that in
Philadelphia the pattern of seasonal mortality was
quite different for Africans. There, although Europeans
had higher death rates in summer and fall just as in
New York (owing to malarial and diarrheic diseases),
for Africans, it was late fall and winter that brought
the highest mortality, probably as a result of respiratory ailments. It is possible that death rates for blacks
in New York climbed in the winter, as they did in
Philadelphia.
The orientations at the New York African Burial
Ground, however, suggest fewer burials in winter
than in other months and a high frequency of burials
that, if sunset was in fact used as a guide, took place
during the early summer. If burials were postponed
during the winter, we would expect high frequencies
in early spring when the ground first thawed, rather
than early summer.
We suggest that if bodies were being oriented with
reference to the sun, the actual path of the sun on the
day of interment was not always, or even typically,
used. The digging of the grave probably did not occur
at the interment itself, but earlier in the day, so that
where the sun set on the funeral evening would not
have dictated the precise orientation. Instead, perhaps
a convention based generally on sunset was used for
westward orientation. The summer solstice is close
to the peak in frequency (90) seen at the New York
Table 16. Deaths Recorded for Reformed Dutch Church and Trinity Church in the
Eighteenth Century, by Month
Month
Reformed Dutch Church
Trinity Church
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
January
307
6.41
39
8.84
February
239
4.99
25
5.67
March
296
6.18
35
7.94
April
262
5.47
40
9.07
May
282
5.89
32
7.26
June
249
5.20
20
4.54
July
426
8.90
46
10.43
August
751
15.69
49
11.11
September
723
15.10
49
11.11
October
525
10.96
39
8.84
November
378
7.89
40
9.07
December
350
7.31
27
6.12
4,788
100.00
441
100.00
Total
Note: Dutch records from 1727 to 1775 (New York Genealogical and Biographical Society, Burial Register
of the Reformed Dutch Church in the City of New York, 17271804), Trinity records from 1703 to 1785
(Trinity Church n.d.).
African Burial Ground and may have been a referent. Burials angled with the head well northward of
the solstice (more than 5 off), numbering 22, seem
anomalous but may have been summer interments for
which the path of the sun was estimated.
The season of death can also be addressed through
pollen data that have been analyzed for a small set
of burials, although these data are themselves quite
problematic, as discussed in AppendixG, Part3 of this
volume. Table17 lists possible season of interment
for 14graves based on pollen and head orientation.
There is broad general agreement in most cases, but
for Burials147, 151, 192, 210, and 415, the two possible lines of evidence appear to diverge.
Alignment to Physical Features: Variability might
be accounted for by use of different physical features for different interments. Such features may have
included a fence, a street, the slope of a hill, the palisade, or even visible buildings such as the Almshouse,
pottery factory, or dwellings. The spike in orientation
at 90 west of our grid north at first may seem surprising, as the archaeological site grid can have had no
meaning for those using the cemetery. But the site
grid corresponds to the street grid, and one street,

Broadway, had been laid out during the eighteenth
century. Therefore, it is believed that at least some
burials were aligned with reference to Broadway as
a physical landmark. That is, in order to place burials
on an east-west axis, they were placed perpendicular
to Broadway, which was used as a convenient northsouth axis. Broadway was laid out northward along
the west side of the burial ground in 1723 and was
shown on the Lyne-Bradford Plan surveyed in 1730
and on all subsequent maps (see Chapter2 chronology
entries for the years 1723 and 1730 and Figure15).
It is also possible that some of the 90 west-oriented
burials, using a similar shorthand reckoning of the
east-west axis, were aligned with later buildings in
the immediate vicinity, which themselves would have
been aligned with the street.
The burials with orientations similar to that of the
patent boundary line may have been aligned with a
fence or a road or path that paralleled it. The number of
graves located to the north of the projected fence line
that appear to share that boundarys general southwestnortheast alignment, especially noticeable in the area to

Table 17. Comparison of Potential Seasonality Data from Pollen and Burial Orientation
Burial
No.
Possible Season(s) of Interment

Based on Pollen Analysis
Orientation (Degrees
West of Grid North)
Possible Season(s) of Interment

Based on Angle of Sunset
June through August
91
May through July
45
June to September
86
June
115
June to September
94
May through early August
147
fall
81
June
151
June to September
138
October through November or

February through March
155
June through August
92
May
192
May through August or fall
116
March through April
194
May to September
104
April or August
207
June through August
93
May
210
fall
88
June
270
June to September
97
April through May or

July through August
366
summer or fall
118
March or September
392
May through August or

June to September
head to east
415
fall
99
the west of the 110East grid line, is intriguing considering our hypothesis that these graves are post-fence.
Either the fence was in fact still in place when these
graves were dug, or the burials were oriented to something else, either the sun (in which case the interments
were in spring or fall) or another feature. As noted in
Chapter4, the ditches visible at the westernmost end
of the site in Lot12 also shared a similar southwestnortheast alignment. It is possible they represent the
remains of another boundary or roadway leading from
Broadway along the south edge of the Calk Hook Farm
and that this served as a visual marker for aligning
graves west to east. Finally, as we also noted in Chapter4, these graves may have been arranged in rows
along the contours of the hillside, and their orientation
may simply reflect the direction of the slope.
Burials in the southeast portion of the excavated
cemetery also may have been oriented with reference
to the town palisade, a prominent feature from 1754
to 1760. The palisade raked southwest to northeast
just south of this portion of the ground (see Figure19
in Chapter 2).
late April or early August
Alignment to Neighboring Graves: Many burials

may have been aligned with reference to the nearest
known or visible graves. This seems most likely in
cases where burials were simultaneous or very close
in time and/or were marked and were of individuals
for whom some kind of close relationship was being
acknowledged or expressed. Well-marked graves may
have been visible for many years and thus could be
used for orienting nearby burials. Pairs and groups of
parallel graves are noted in Chapters69.
If several burials, unrelated to each other or to
existing clusters of graves, were being conducted at
one time (perhaps in the space of 1 or 2days), it is
quite possible a grave digger would have made the
graves parallel and near to one another for convenience. This may have occurred at the spring thaw, if
the burials for those who died in the coldest part of
winter had been postponed.4 Likewise, deaths during
an epidemic may have occasioned the preparation of
We thank Robert Paynter for suggesting this as a possible explanation
for burials in apparent parallel alignments.
4
several graves at once. Nol Hume (1982:3637) has
proposed this as an explanation for precisely parallel
adjacent graves at Carters Grove, reasoning that if
graves were not simultaneous, there would be little
likelihood grave diggers would be able to make them
so perfectly aligned.
It should also be remembered that if particular
individuals had responsibility for digging graves,
change in this personnel could account for variation.
The possibility of orienting burials to other features
or to the sun would still apply, with the reference
point selected by the grave digger. If the sunset was
used, variation in types of grave shaft should not
correspond to variation in orientation. If a physical
feature selected by the grave digger was used, however, we might expect grave shaft style or shape
to co-vary with orientation. Analysis of grave shafts
by shape has not been attempted but is suggested for
future research.
Supine Extended Body Position
Table 18. Arm Position

Arm Position
Resting on pelvis
93
Both at sides
47
Right at side, left on pelvis
Left at side, right on pelvis
Both flexed at sides
Crossed right over left
Crossed left over right
Left flexed, right at side
Right flexed, left at side
Right at side
Left at side
Right flexed
4
a
Left flexed a
Left on pelvis
Of 269burials at the New York African Burial Ground

for which the position of the body could be definitively determined, 100percent were supinethat is,
the deceased had been laid on their backs. For 204
of these supine burials, the position of the arms and
hands has also been determined (Table 18). When
excavated, the hands were usually resting on the
pelvis or upper legs of the deceased. The next most
common arm/hand position was at the sides, although
in some of these burials the person may have been
placed with the hands resting on the pelvis, and they
later fell to the sides. Arm positions in general were
consistent with what would be expected for a wrapped/
shrouded corpse.
Not surprisingly, leg position is much less variable.
In nearly all cases, the legs were extended straight
down from the hips. In two cases, the ankles were
crossed, and in a few burials, one or both legs were
slightly bent at the knee. These individuals may have
been laid in the coffin with bent legs. Alternatively,
the shifting of the coffin during interment may have
caused the bending.
Data on head position have been collected but are
not believed to be diagnostic, because given the supine
position of the body, the head would have rolled to one
side or the other, back or forward, during interment
or decomposition.
The supine extended body position is so uniform at
the New York African Burial Ground as to constitute,
Number of Burials
4
a
Over head
Crossed over chest
Other
The position of the other arm could not be determined.

The arms were flexed and lying across the body in
various positions.
b
along with coffin burial and orientation, part of an

accepted mortuary program. This position was typical of European Christian burial, but supine extended
burial was just one of a wide range of positions used
in African societies from which captives were taken
(Handler and Lange 1978:198, 318 n. 28). Other
diaspora examples, however, show a similar preference for the supine extended position.
Shrouding
Cloth was seldom recovered at the New York African Burial Ground, and fragments were preserved
only when in association with metal artifacts. In
the absence of cloth or any evidence for clothing,
shrouding or clothes without durable fasteners may
be inferred. Small copper alloy straight pins with
wire-wound heads were observed in and/or recovered
from 213burials, representing approximately 65percent of those burials that appeared to have adequate

preservation for pins to have survived (n=327).5 This
may be an underrepresentation of the total number of
burials that originally contained pins, because where
preservation was especially poor or the burial was
disturbed, these fragile items may have been lost.
Pins may have been used to fasten cloth in which the
deceased was wrapped or partially wrapped, but it
should be remembered that they might also represent
clothing fasteners, especially for women. In most
cases, young children and infants appear to have
been more fully wrapped, although many adults had
pins on the cranium only. Pins are present in all age
groups, but they were observed in a higher percentage
of childrens graves than adults. Pins and shrouding
are discussed further in Chapter11.
Shrouding was documented at Elmina, in Ghana,
prior to the introduction of coffin burial in the nineteenth century (DeCorse 1992:183) but was not in evidence at the Newton Plantation cemetery in Barbados.
Handler and Lange (1978:185) have hypothesized that
most enslaved Africans were buried clothed, although
shroud pins or winding cloth may not have survived
to enter the archaeological record.
Individual Interment and Shared

and Clustered Graves
The overarching mortuary program as performed at
the cemetery called for individual interment. Shared
graves are exceptional, although they appear in all
temporal groups. By shared, we mean burial in the
same grave (see Figure53), rather than burial in
close proximity. There were 27instances of shared
or possible shared graves. In some of these cases,
the individuals were apparently interred at the same
time. In other cases, there may have been an interval
after which a second burial was placed in a grave
shaft already in use. Family relationships can only
be hypothesized at this point, although future DNA
analysis may confirm consanguinity in some cases.
A mother-child relationship can be assumed with
All burials were assessed for the likelihood of artifact preservation
(see Chapter3). The burials without pins from which the cranium
was missing are not included in the total burial count here, as pins
are most often found on the cranium. However, two burials without
crania that did contain pins, Burials67 and 81, are counted in the
total. Six severely disturbed sets of remains had pins or pin staining:
Burials20, 131, 175, 189, 303, and 319; these are included in the
total. However, two burials for which there was no way to assign pin
fragments to an individual owing to redeposition, Burials398 and
403, are excluded from the count.
5
some confidence in the cases of Burials335 and 356,

where the woman cradled the newborn in her arm,
and Burials12 and 14, where the infants coffin had
been placed on the womans torso. In other cases, we
are reluctant to assume parent/child relationships,
since other types of relatives may have been seen as
appropriate to share the grave.
The shared or possibly shared graves are listed
in Table19. Most involve infants or children buried
together (n=12) or with an adult (n=12 or 13). In
many other cases, we believe individuals were placed
deliberately in relation to each other, although not
in the same grave. Among these, one pattern is of
infants and young children being placed above or
immediately adjacent to the graves of adults (see site
maps in Chapters68 and Part2 of this volume).
Examples of these grave clusters are Burials29 (Early
Group) and 46 and 22 (both Middle Group); Burials67 and 60 (Late-Middle Group); Burials42, 61,
and 64 (Late-Middle Group); Burials101 and 108
(Late-Middle Group); Burial280 (Early Group) and
Burials295, 246, and 215 (Middle Group) and 229
and 239 (Late-Middle Group); and Burials300, 306,
and 283 (Middle Group).
In a number of cases, an infant was found interred
at the foot end of an adults grave, overlapping and/
or offset to one side, its coffin parallel. These burials
represent Early, Middle, and Late-Middle temporal
groups, and include one adult (first burial number
given) and one or more children. Some examples are
Middle Group Burials46 and 22; Late-Middle Group
Burials67 and 60; Middle Group Burials69 and 53;
Middle Group Burials90, 79, and 8; Late-Middle
Group Burials101 and 108; Middle Group Burials159, 161 and 206; Early Group Burials250 and
249; and Early Group Burial177 and Middle Group
Burial128.6 The adults in this type of burial included
three men, two women, one probable woman, and
two whose sex could not be determined; they were
all approximately 30years old or older.
There is an excess of children in the main Middle
Group, but there is no reason to believe that child mortality was greater during the middle of the time period
represented at the site than during others (Figure56).
We believe more children appear in the middle grouping because childrens burials from the later periods of
These cases are all located in the western half of the site, although
this distribution is not considered significant, as the eastern half of
the site was never fully excavated. Burials177 and 128 are placed in
the Early and Middle Groups respectively, but the child may still have
been placed deliberately at the foot of the earlier adult grave.
6
Table 19. Shared Graves and Possible Shared Graves at the New York African Burial Ground
Burial No.
Map Location
12 and 14
S 89.5, E 12 Woman aged 3545 with a newborn; the infant appeared

to have been in its own coffin but within the coffin of the
woman; interred at the same time; Late Group
25 and 32
72, 83, and

84
S 87, E 20
Comments
Adult/
Child
Woman in her early 20s stacked atop a man 5060 years

old; the woman had suffered trauma and had a musket ball
lodged in her rib cage; possibly interred at the same time;
Middle Group
S 87.5, E 34 Possible shared grave; two very young children placed

above a young woman 1721 years old; burials were disturbed by a later foundation; Early Group
79 and 90
S 82, E 5
Possible shared grave with an infant placed above the foot

end of a burial of a woman in her late 30s; soil intervened;
the womans coffin was hexagonal, the childs tapered;
not buried at the same time; Middle Group
89 and 107
S 90, E 48
Possible shared grave; a woman in her 50s placed above a

woman in her late 30s, both in hexagonal coffins; the top
coffin was offset to the south but apparently in the same
grave; possible interval between burials; the younger woman had a cylindrical red bead near her ear; Late-Middle
Group
94 and 96
S 94, E 47
An infant centered precisely above a young man 1618 years

old; both in hexagonal coffins; possible interval between
interments; these burials were part of a cluster with additional child burials; Middle Group
121 and 202
S 86, E 70
A child 2.54.5 years old placed atop an adolescent (a

probable female) 1218 years old; both were in tapered
coffins; Early Group
A woman of 2530 years with an infant/newborn and a

child of 612 months placed directly atop her coffin; the
womans coffin was hexagonal and the two babies four
sided; Middle Group
146 and 145
S 73.5, E 74 An infant under 6 months old in a coffin placed atop an

empty adult coffin; located along south side of posthole
alignment; Late-Middle Group
X?
159 and 161
S 73.5, E 90 An infant or young child placed adjacent to the coffin

(near the foot end) of a woman 2535 years old; the grave
may also be shared with Burial 206, another infant or child
grave adjacent on the opposite side; all are in coffins, the
womans hexagonal, the childrens rectangular; Middle
Group
S 88, E 90
126 and 143 S 88.5, E 80.5 Two children, one 3.55.5 and one 610 years old, shared
a single coffin, with the younger child placed atop the
elder; the coffin was hexagonal and deep in construction;
Middle Group
142, 144, and
149
Children Adults

Table 19. Shared Graves and Possible Shared Graves at the New York African Burial Ground (continued)
Burial No.
Map Location
Comments
Adult/
Child
Burials 224, S 77.5, E 97 Three infants in a likely shared grave; Burial 224 was of a
231, and 234
child between 6 and 16 months old, Burial 234 of an infant less than 6 months old, and no age can be assigned for
Burial 231, but the coffin was infant-sized; all of the coffins were probably four sided, possibly tapering toward
the foot; Middle Group
219 and 235 S 71.5, E 123 Possible shared grave; a child 45 years old placed above
a woman aged 2842 years, apparently in the same grave
shaft but with an interval of time between interments; both
in coffins; severe disturbance to the grave from construction; Late-Middle Group
Children Adults
225 and 252
S 64.5, E 95 An infant between 6 and 15 months old placed above a

child of 12 years; the upper coffin was offset slightly to
the north; Late Group
226 and 221
S 83.5, E 77 An infant of 2 months or less placed atop a man of 30

60 years, both in tapered coffins; the infant had a string of
fired-glass beads at the neck; Early Group
255 and 265
S 82, E 120 Two infants, one less than 2 months old and one 6
12 months old, in coffins placed one atop the other in a
shared grave; poor skeletal preservation; Middle Group
263 and 272
S 88.5, E 74 Infant burials placed one atop the other in the same grave;
both were in four-sided coffins; probable Early Group
based on stratigraphy
268 and 286
S 75, 126 E Infant of 6 months or less, placed above a child between 4

and 8 years old; both in coffins, probably hexagonal; Middle Group
293 and 291
S 82.5, E 94 An adult man (age undetermined) and child 35 years old

may have shared a grave; the burials were disturbed by a
later grave, and some skeletal remains of the adult and
those of the child were displaced into the later grave shaft;
Middle Group
311 and 316
S 88.5, E 99 An infant 39 months old placed in the corner of the grave

of a woman 1820 years old; the womans coffin was hexagonal, the infants tapered; not buried at the same time;
Late-Middle Group
314 and 338
S 82, E 134 Possible shared grave, with a man of 4050 years and a
woman 3365 laying side by side, both in hexagonal coffins; Late-Middle Group
318 and 321 S 79.5, E 144 Possible shared grave; bones of a child 714 years old, apparently in place, within the upper part of the grave of a
child 12 years old; possibly isolated from other burials;
Middle Group
320 and 334
S 89, E 251 Possible shared grave; child of 24 years and another

young child, in immediately adjacent, aligned coffins;
disturbed by construction; Middle Group
Table 19. Shared Graves and Possible Shared Graves at the New York African Burial Ground (continued)
Burial No.
Map Location
Adult/
Child
Comments
326 and 374 S 75.5, E 135 An infant of 3 months or less was placed adjacent to left
side of a man of 4555 years, near the head, in the same
grave shaft; they appear to have been buried at the same
time; both in coffins; Middle Group
335 and 356 S 84.5, E 248 A woman 2535 years old and a newborn buried together
in a hexagonal coffin; infant lay within the womans
flexed right arm; Middle Group
Children Adults
341 and 397 S 87.5, E 229 A man of undetermined age and a woman 3040 years
old; the mans coffin had been placed atop the womans in
a shared grave; cuff links were found with the man; the
womans teeth were modified by distal chipping; Middle
Group
393 and 405
S 84, E 211 An infant or newborn placed with a child 610 years old;
both in narrow coffins of undetermined shape; not buried
at the same time; Middle Group
Figure 56. Adult/subadult distribution

by temporal group.
the cemetery were placed in, above, or near existing

graves from earlier periods, but these childrens burials
cannot be otherwise distinguished as later. The early
groups low frequency of child burials is probably a
result of reduced preservation. Thus, the subadult age
profiles broken down by period (Chapters69) must
be considered provisional.
Another type of cluster includes several child burials in close proximity to each other, such as Burials98,
100, 102, and 103; and Burials224, 231, and 234
(a shared grave), 232, 254, and 240. The latter type
of spatial grouping may reflect the setting aside of
specific locations for child burials at particular times

during the cemeterys history or may indicate that
the deaths of numerous children took place in a short
period of time, as could be expected to occur during
an epidemic.
There were no mass graves, in which a number of
individuals would be stacked in a single large opening
at one time. Such interments would have been expected
only in the case of epidemics, war, or mass executions.
Although all of these events occurred during the period
the cemetery was in use (see Chapters69), there is no
evidence of mass interments within the area excavated.

Such graves may exist elsewhere within the cemetery,
but the evidence in the excavated burial ground clearly
shows that New Yorkers living under slavery called
attention to the uniqueness of each individual when
they buried the dead.
Only in the northern cemetery area were most burials spatially separate from others. We think this lower
density of graves reflects a shorter period of use, as
discussed in Chapter4. But it may also represent a
response to demographic shifts during the Revolutionary War and its aftermath. Fewer co-interments
(shared graves and deliberately proximal graves)
and a rise in graves spaced in rows may have been
a grave diggers respectful solution to two kinds of
predicaments: a spate of burials on a single day or in
a short span of time, or an increase in burials of recent
arrivals without relatives or friends in the cemetery.
The special circumstances of the Late Group of burials
are explored in Chapter9.
Individual burial, then, did not mean isolated burial.
Although actual shared graves are relatively uncommon, most burials overlap or are within a foot or
two of others. Although we do not know whether
the management of the African Burial Ground was
centralized or dispersed; as explained in Chapter2,
there is no reason to suppose that it was not African
controlled. In this scenario, we should expect burial
grouping. In order to conduct a systematic spatial
analysis, one needs to devise a spatial syntax that
can help organize the material; the key tactic is the
search for patterns. Burials occurred in chronological
sequences and were more or less isolated or arranged
in larger concentrations, into clusters, and, finally, into
more or less discrete groups, sets, or pairs.
There was a range of opinion among the researchers regarding our ability to define burial groups and
subsets, but because it is unlikely that people buried
their family and neighbors in a geographically random way, we consider the existence of groupings
almost certain. We have tried to recognize them
archaeologically or at least to present the site data
in a manner open to interpretation by others. Spatial
analysis is one way to allow the burial ground, as
we encounter it archaeologically, to speak to us
of its use and of the historical community. To the
extent that viewers (whether archaeologists or others who encounter the site records) perceive spatial
relationships among interments, ideas can be generated about how the ritual space was constructed
over time and about social relationships among the
deceased. We raise additional possibilities about the
internal geography of the excavated cemetery in the

section entitled Additional Observations on Internal
Geography.
Clothing, Personal Adornment,

and Other Items
Distinguishing between grave goods and items of
clothing/personal adornment that can be categorized as
dressing the dead is problematic. The dressing of the
deceased can be seen as one aspect of their preparation
for their new state of being, and therefore, in a sense,
the distinction is moot. Items that cannot be categorized as clothing or adornment but are likely goods
meant to guide, equip, or accompany the deceased in
the world of the deadtools, items for personal use,
or talismansmight include a knife, a smoking pipe,
a piece of coral or shell, or an item held in the hand
or placed around the neck.
Items other than pins found in direct association
with the skeletal remains included buttons, beads,
rings, cuff links and other miscellaneous jewelry, and
remnants of cloth, shell, smoking pipes, knives, metal,
coins, and possibly floral tributes. Any of these items
may have been the personal property of the deceased,
and any of them may have had symbolic or spiritual
significance. Clothing, adornment, and other miscellaneous items placed with the dead are described in
Chapters1214. Clothing fasteners were reliably associated with 33burials and other adornment items with
just 13others. Other kinds of objects (not considered
clothing or jewelry) were found with an equally small
number of burials. It is certain that some items placed
with burials were not preserved, particularly those of
cloth, wood, or plant materials.
Thus it appears that street clothes or adornment and/
or the placement of grave goods in the grave was not
considered a necessary component of the mortuary
program as it was typically enacted at the African
Burial Ground. We hasten to point out, however, that
dressing the dead or including items in the grave certainly may have been an integral part of death ritual
performed for particular individuals.
Grave Markers
In the part of the New York African Burial Ground
where the old ground surface was recorded, at least
some of the graves were marked with stones (Figures5761). In addition, one coffin (in Burial194) had
Figure 57. Burials at the southwest corner of the

excavated cemetery that were marked with cobbles
at the surface. This style of grave marking has been
observed throughout the African Diaspora over a
broad temporal span (Thompson 1983:137; Vlach
1978:139-45) (photograph by Dennis Seckler).
Figure 58. Excavated grave of Burial 18 with stone

marker in place at its west (head) end. Arrows point
to the coffin outlines of Burial 7, cutting into the
north profile, and Burial 11, at the lower left. Both
of these graves lay above the coffin in Burial 18
Figure 59. Vertical slab of stone found above

Burial 47 and the line of cobbles along the north
side of the grave. The stone and cobbles were
designated Features 1 and 2 during the excavation
(photography by Dennis Seckler).
Figure 60. Stone that appears to have been a marker

for Burial 23. At the time the photograph was taken,
Burial 23 had not been defined, and the stone had
been removed when the grave was excavated and
recorded. North is to the right (photograph by Dennis
Seckler).
Figure 61. View of larger excavation area with the

same stone shown in Figure 60, in relation to nearby
lines of cobbles (photograph by Dennis Seckler).
a vertical post attached to its headboard, presumably

meant to extend above the ground surface to mark the
grave. The presence of marked graves suggests that the
cemetery was visitedperhaps for the performance of
second funerals or periodic postinterment rituals
and that subsequent graves could have been sited with
reference to the marked ones.
The stone grave markers were of two types: rectangular slabs placed vertically near the head of the
grave and rows of small cobbles arranged so as to
outline a grave or possibly a group of graves. The
preservation of the markers indicates that these graves
were covered over with fill when their surfaces were
still intact.
Because markers were found in the one area where
their preservation was possible, we think it is likely
that such markers were also used elsewhere at the

cemetery. Archaeologists who were present during the
mechanical clearing of the site did not observe grave
markers, and it is possible they had been removed
during the early phases of development and filling
of the property.
Additional Observations
on Internal Geography
Graves were not distributed uniformly across the
archaeologically excavated burial ground. From a
birds-eye view of the site (represented by the site
maps in Figures7, pocket map, and 46 in Chapter 4),
at least three spatial patterns or features are visible:
areas of relatively dense and relatively sparse graves,
possible rows of graves, and, in the less densely used
areas, grave spacing.
As discussed in Chapter4, graves in the portion
of the cemetery to the north of the alignment of postholes were relatively sparse compared to the area to
the south. This is probably attributable to a shorter
period of use. But within the area south of the former fence line, there are also areas that were more
densely packed with graves than others. In Chapter3,
we hypothesized that the original topography may
account for this, with the flatter areas used more than
the slopes (see Figure44 in Chapter 4). It is also possible, however, that the densest areas of the excavated
cemetery had a sociological basis, and perhaps social,
ethnic or religious groups used particular corners of
the burial ground repeatedly to bury their own. The
early coffin type (tapering) clusters in two of the
denser areas of the cemetery (see Chapter6), and it
is possible that the concentrations we now see result
from the reuse of particular plots over longer periods
of time than others.
There are a number of possible rows of graves
aligned roughly north-south across the excavated
site, which may correspond to contours in the original hillside (Figure62). These are easiest to discern
beginning in the northern part of the site, such as
between grid lines 80 and 140East. It is possible
some of these rows extend all the way to the southern
edge of the site. In this case, it is possible that rows of
graves were in place prior to the use of the area north
of the fence line and were extended northward after
the fence was demolished. Chapter9, which discusses
the Late Group of burials, addresses the question of
rows and grave siting.
In places where there were adjacent graves with
few or no superimposed burials, such as in the rows,
a kind of spatial syntax is hinted at, with burials
spaced deliberately apart. This is discussed further
in Chapter7.
Was there any patterning of graves by age or sex?
There are a few places where numerous childrens
and infants graves seem to cluster, usually with one
or more adult graves included. One cluster is beneath
Burial207, mentioned in Chapter4 and discussed
further in Chapter6; others are discussed in Chapter7. Sex distribution is skewed, with a preponderance of men in the northern part of the cemetery (see
Chapter9). Otherwise, men, women, and children
are distributed more or less evenly across the entire
excavated site, relative to overall density.
Distinctive Womens Graves in the

Southeastern Area of the Site
There is one area, in the far eastern part of the excavated site, where distinctive womens burials were
found (Figure63). There are a number of possible
rows of graves aligned roughly north-south across
the excavated site, which may correspond to contours
in the original hillside.
Middle Group Burials365 and 383 were highly
unusual in that they were oriented with their heads
to the south rather than the west. The two burials
were 10feet apart. No age could be calculated for the
woman in Burial365; the young woman in Burial383
was determined to be between 14 and 18years old.
Burial365 was truncated, with only the legs, feet,
and portion of the left hand remaining, although these
elements were articulated. It is unlikely that the entire
burial had been displaced into a north-south orientation, as a grave-shaft outline was recorded, and the
extant portion of the coffin appeared intact. Upon the
lid of the coffin, an oyster shell and an artifact made
from shell and metal were found (see Chapter14).
Middle Group Burials371 and 375 and Late-Middle
Group Burial377 were of women with no coffins but
with unique personal effects. Although the grave of
Burial371 (Figure64) had been partially destroyed by
construction of a massive concrete footing in February
1992, the surviving portion (the upper body) was relatively intact. The grave, which held a woman between
25 and 35years old, had a remarkably straight-sided
shaft, which tapered toward the head end. The grave
was considerably deeper than others excavated in
this area, and another grave had been dug into it, well
above the womans remains. Two turquoise enamel
cuff-link faces, each decorated with a squat, whiteand-pink V and two dots, were found beneath the
womans left upper arm. Given their location and
the lack of a connecting shank or link between them,
it is unlikely that they fastened a shirtsleeve. These
items were unique within the assemblage from the
cemetery; how they were worn or used is not known
(see Chapter13).
Only two other coffinless graves were assigned to
the Middle Group, Burial375, also of a woman, and
Burial434, of undetermined sex. The 1618-year-old
woman in this grave had been buried with her arms
crossed above her head, a unique position at the New
York African Burial Ground (Figure65). The east
end of the grave had been disturbed by construction
Figure 62. Detail of the site plan (see Figure 7, pocket map). Row-like alignments of
graves spanned the site from south to north. These may reflect the contours of the
hillside.
Figure 63. Detail from site plan (see Figure 7,

pocket map) showing locations of distinctive
womens graves in the southeast corner of the
excavated site.
Figure 64. In situ drawing, Burial 371. Remains are

shown here at a scale of 1 inch = 2 feet. The button
or cuff-link faces were 14 by 11 mm (drawing by W.
Williams).
activity (although the feet appear to be missing in the

photographs and drawings, foot bones were present
when archaeologists exposed the burial).
The idiosyncratic arm position suggests that no
winding sheet wrapped the arms at the time the woman
was placed in the gravebearers may have carried
the corpse by the arms and legs. A ceramic ball with
a copper alloy band encircling it, surrounded by an
organic stain, possibly representing cloth or leather,
was found at the right hip, adjacent to the right femur
head (Figure66). The object is described in full in
Chapter14.
Burial377, assigned to the Late-Middle Group,
held the remains of a woman 3358 years old who
had three rings at her throat, possibly with a bit of
associated thread (these items were never received in
the laboratory but were documented in the fieldsee

Chapter13). This woman also had been buried without
a coffin, although possible wood staining was noted
above and below the skeletal remains. Excavators suggested that boards might have been placed above and
below the body, although the residue could have been
from the coffin of a prior burial that was disturbed by
Burial377. A substance that excavators believed to be
red ocher was observed on the possible wood remains
and on the head, ribs, and scapulae.7
The presence of three burials of women in coffinless graves close to one another and that contained
distinctive personal effects is noteworthy. Most burials
without coffins are of men and are in the Late Group,
mainly in the northern part of the excavated site. The
womens graves may be incorrectly assigned to the
Middle temporal groups and could belong instead
with the majority of other coffinless burials in our
Late Group, although the stratigraphic position of
Burial371 argues against this.
The final distinctive womans grave in this area of
the site, Burial340, had a coffin, was oriented with
the head to the west, and lay in the typical position,
Red ocher (a pigment made from iron oxide) was used by Native
Americans from the early Archaic (the Lamoka period in New York,
ca.4,500years ago), was a component of elaborate burial sites of the
Orient peoples (ca.3,000years ago) on Long Island, and continued
to be used into late prehistoric and historic times. Recent scholarship
has explored the possible symbolic significance of the color red
among Native Americans (see Cantwell and Wall 2001:6970; Ritchie
1965).
7

Figure 65. In situ photograph of Burial 375, with arms
crossed above head (photograph by Dennis Seckler).
Figure 66. In situ drawing of artifacts at the hip of the

woman in Burial 375 (drawing by M. Schur).
supine and extended. Burial340 was nevertheless

unique and is one of the most extensively described
interments at the New York African Burial Ground.
It held a woman between 39 and 64years who had
been buried wearing a strand of beads and cowrie
shells at her hips and a bracelet of beads on the right
wrist (Figure67), as well as an unused smoking pipe.
The coffin was four sided and tapered toward the
foot and although located near the pottery midden,
the grave predated that feature and was placed in the
Early Group.
Most of the beads were found in a line that circled
once around the womans hips, although most of
the beads were recovered from the sides. A total of
112glass beads were ultimately recovered, along with
1amber bead and 7cowries (9cowries were recorded
in the field, but 1 of the cowries was later found to be
a fragment of bone). Another cowrie was not recoverable and may have been an impression of a shell in
the soil (LaRoche 1994a:19). The waist beads varied
in color. With the exception of two specimens with
adventitious decoration, the beads were simple, drawn
types (see Chapter13 for descriptions).
Excavators originally believed that some of the
beads (a line of tiny, alternating blue-green and pale
yellow beads) were worn on the womans right wrist

but later decided that all beads were probably from
the strand at her waist because no hand or wrist
bones underlay the in situ beads. Yet the interpretation of the distinct strand of alternating blue-green
and yellow beads as a bracelet is compatible with
its location beneath extant hand/wrist bones and
seems much more plausible than their interpretation as part of the waist beads. There were 15 of
the yellow beads and 26 of the blue-green beads
recovered, 15 of which were found aligned and in
an alternating pattern (the others were scattered in
the general pelvic area).
Eleven straight pins were found in place, most
on the cranium, suggesting the woman had been
shrouded. A kaolin pipe bowl and joining stem were
recovered from beneath the womans pelvis (this item
is described in Chapter14). The pipe had not been
smoked. The skeletal remains from Burial340 were
poorly preserved, which accounts for the wide range
of the womans estimated age. Her incisors had been
altered to hourglass and peg shapes.
One other womans grave in the same small area
should be mentioned here: Middle Group Burial335
belonged to a woman between 25 and 35years old
Figure 67. In situ photograph of the pelvic area of Burial 340, showing beads. The top arrow points to one of
the cowries, the bottom arrow to the strand of alternating blue-green and yellow beads at the right wrist. See
Chapter 13 for a drawing and additional photographs of the individual beads recovered. Ruler is marked in
inches; north is to the right (photograph by Dennis Seckler).
with an infant (Burial356) held in the crook of her

arm. This is the only burial in the excavated sample
where an infant was so placed (in the case of Burials12 and 14, another woman with an infant, the infant
was in its own coffin).
We consider it possible that the proximity of these
distinctive womens graves to one another was deliberate, which in turn raises the possibility that a special
area of the cemetery existed for women who shared
one or more kinds of social distinction. There is no
way to know whether any such distinction was negative or positive or whether it was formalized in the
management of the cemetery or tacitly agreed upon
by the womens mourners or the community.
Conclusion
It is likely that one of the most important things
enslaved people did on their own time was participate in wakes, funerals, and grave-site gatherings.
Funeral labor involved preparation and transport of
the body, digging the grave, participation in funerary
rituals, closing and marking the grave, and whatever
subsequent actions were necessary to maintain proper
relations with the dead and among living relatives. By
participating in burial-related activities on behalf of

departed loved ones and community members, Africans acted for themselves and each other, reclaiming
their own labor from those who purported to own it.
Labor also extended to the work needed to obtain the
necessary accoutrements of proper burial. The coffin
was a key component. Even when household heads
or the Almshouse wardens supplied them (see Chapter10), such a custom can be viewed as the result of
struggles over the terms of bondage rather than as a
paternalistic gesture. Typical accoutrements appear
to have also included, at a minimum, the shroud or
cloth with which to wrap the body or the limbs and
chin, with or without pins (see Chapter11).
Other material goods found with the deceased also
can shed light on how Africans acted on their own
account. When a person was buried wearing jewelry or
clothing, or with other objects that belonged to them in
life, a claim was made about the inalienability of their
possessions. Those possessions were likely obtained
through own-account activities. Africans in colonial
New York, including those who were enslaved, created opportunities to earn money of their own to
purchase small luxuries. Goods within easy reach
may have been vended on the sly or fenced at wellknown taverns and the proceeds spent on personal

itemsor personal items may themselves have been
stolen goods.8 The burial of possessions took them
out of circulation and fixed them to the deceased,
symbolically defying a system that denied property
to, and defined as property, an entire people.
The richness of the nonmaterial aspects of African
funerals (rituals that do not enter the documentary
or archaeological record) is lost to us. But based on
the material record, it is reasonable to propose that
an insistence upon the full humanity of the deceased
might well have been at the spiritual and political
heart of burial at this cemetery. Most individuals
Laws passed to stifle the enterprise of bondmen and bondwomen
provide a glimpse of some of the revenue-generating projects Africans
undertook after work or on their masters time. Africans were banned
from selling independently grown crops and livestock; gathered
fruits; home-made commodities and crafts, such as soap; and oysters
gathered from beds in New York waters. Colonial Manhattans unfree
African workforce encompassed the skilled as well as the unskilled.
Africans labored in city homes and on nearby farms but also in the
warehouses, workshops, and markets that provisioned a bustling
port. African blacksmiths, coopers, cord makers, brewers, butchers,
and tailors may have profited from their skills, as suggested by
legislation forbidding Africans to hire out as day laborers without
their masters consent. On own-account economic activities of New
Yorks Africans, see Historical Perspectives of the African Burial
Ground (Medford etal. 2009h:6364; see also Linebaugh and Rediker
2000:181182). Some of the restrictive legislation that gives us a
glimpse of economic activities includes colony-wide laws (New York
State 1894:1:157, 761767, 845, :2:679688) and city ordinances
(New York City Common Council 1905:1:232, :4:497498). The
variety of occupations of Africans is learned from sale and escapee
advertisements and from the censuses of 1703 and 1790.
8
were buried without any personal goods, some even

without a coffin, yet the digging of an individual
grave for the deceased, care in the orientation of
the grave, and the placement of each body in a specific position (supine and extended) and probably
wrapped, testifies to a degree of attention and respect
accorded to all.
The acts of interment that we are able to witness
at a historical distance speak most importantly of
the individuals relationship to othersto family but
also to a larger community. The conformity that
the record implies should be seen in this context. We
think the cemetery provided a way for a community
to form through the communal performance of a
fundamental rite of passage. If via the archaeological record we are seeing mainly the shared aspects
of mortuary behavior, then we have a remarkable
window on a critical historical process. It is possible
the common burial practices that are so evident within
the excavated site took root during the beginning years
of the burial ground, perhaps even earlier, when New
Amsterdams first Africans were interred in the West
India Companys common cemetery. Because the
African Burial Ground subsequently would have been
one of the few sites where black men, women, and
children could act communally and on each others
behalf, it would have been a key place and institution
for the continual incorporation of diverse newcomers
into the fold.

Chapter 7
The Middle Group

Warren R. Perry, Jean Howson, and Augustin F. C. Holl
Most burials in the archaeologically excavated portion of the African Burial Ground are placed in the
main or Middle Group, by default, because they were
not clearly assignable to earlier or later cohorts. Yet
even though the temporal groupings are relative rather
than absolute, it is likely that burials assigned to the
Middle Group were indeed interred during the middle
decades of the eighteenth century. For convenience,
we describe the period of New Yorks history from
approximately 1735 to 1760, when the cemetery would
have been intensively used.
A sketch of the town and the development in the
area of the burial ground is presented, along with an
overview of the African population and the mortuary
sample. The material culture and spatial distribution
of the Middle Group burials are then discussed, followed by a description of some unique and unusual
interments.
The Town
The city was in an economic recession in the 1730s.
Aside from the Almshouse complex, begun in 1735
on the Common, construction in the area near the
African Burial Ground was minimal. But the citys
inexorable northward push soon resumed. Residential
and commercial development proceeded up the west
side of Broadway to present-day Warren Street (at the
southwest corner of the burial ground). Development
on the east side of town extended even farther north.
The relative remoteness of the African Burial Ground
also was reduced when the road along the east side
of the Common (Park Row) was cut through to the
Bowery and Pearl Street was extended westward.
Two pleasure grounds northwest of the cemetery, the
Ranelagh Gardens and the Vauxhall Gardens, drew
city residents beyond the settled edge of the town

(see the Grim, Maerschalk, and Montressor Plans
[see Figures18 and 19 in Chapter 2, and Figure 29 in
Chapter 3]; see Harris etal. 1993; Homberger 1994;
Hunter Research 1994).
The Corselius/Crolius and Remmey pottery works
were located in the eastern part of the Van Borsum patent by 1741. These pottery works shared space with the
African Burial Ground, and at least one of them used a
portion of the cemetery as a dump for waste material
from the kilns. A palisade that spanned the width of the
city was erected in 1745. It crossed the southern portion
of the African Burial Ground, and burials were probably
restricted to the area north of its line-of-march. During
the time the palisade stood, access from the town to the
cemetery required passing through a gate.
The Common drew large crowds in 17391740
and again in 1741. Thousands of whites and blacks
turned out to hear evangelist George Whitefield preach
in 17391740 at the height of a surge in religious
enthusiasm known as the Great Awakening (Burrows
and Wallace 1999:157158). Protestant churches during this time were reluctant to accept Africans, but
the evangelicals called for the baptism and humane
treatment of captives. There is no evidence that the
enslaved Africans of New York embraced evangelical
Protestant faith as a result, although some contemporaries would suggest that Africans were spurred to
insurrection in 1741 by the preaching (see Linebaugh
and Rediker 2000:192193). The churches of New
York did have black congregants, although few in
number, during the middle decades of the eighteenth
century. Only three burials of blacks were recorded:
one in the Reformed Dutch churchyard in 1729 (a free
black woman) and two in the churchyard of Trinity
Lutheran in the 1740s, one of a free black woman
and one of an illegitimate mulatto child (New York
150 Warren R. Perry, Jean Howson, and Augustin F. C. Holl

Genealogical and Biographical Society, Burial Register of the Reformed Dutch Church in the City of New
York, 17271804; Stryker-Rodda 1974:8485).
A year after Whitefields visit, crowds assembled
again to watch the executions of 30enslaved Africans and 4Europeans convicted of conspiring to
burn the town. The Panic or Conspiracy of 1741
centered on a series of fires set during late March and
early April. A grand jury concluded that the alleged
arsonists were part of a wider network involving the
citys black population and a handful of European
ringleaders. More than 200people were arrested with
the aid of testimony coerced under threat, extricated
through torture, or purchased through cash rewards.
Underground activity involving the participation of
both blacks and poor whites was exposed, highlighting the ability of people on the margins of society
to move about, meet clandestinely, frequent taverns,
plan and launch criminal actions, organize clubs,
and forge unions with free persons.1 Thirteen of the
convicted Africans were burned at the stake, and 17
were hanged. The hangings took place near the powder
house at the south end of the Fresh Water pond and the
burnings a bit further to the southeast (see Figure18
in Chapter 2). It is not known when and where the
executed individuals were buried. The corpses of some
of those who were gibbeted were left in chains to rot
(see Lepore 2005:170171); the desecration of the
corpses constituted both an added punishment of the
convicted and a warning to the community.
Did city residents gather on the Common to celebrate Pinkster, the Dutch holiday of Pentecost (English Whitsuntide)? The holiday was marked in New
Netherland from at least the 1640s. By the second half
of the eighteenth century, Africans in New York colony
and New England held distinctive celebrations using
town commons for Pinkster and Negro Election Day,
respectively. These festivals involved large gatherings
for drumming, dance, food, drink, and lampooning
typical of carnival. There is no documentary evidence

for large-scale celebrations of black Pinkster in New
York City.2
Legal restrictions on the economic pursuits of bondmen and bondwomen were tightened in this period,
thereby providing an unintended glimpse of how
black New Yorkers sought to gain a foothold in the
economy. In August 1740, for example, the Common
Council passed a law restricting the marketing of
produce, stating that
The events have been interpreted variously as a trumped-up

conspiracy and subsequent witch-hunt, the actions of a theft ring
that were prosecuted overzealously, a true conspiracy but one that was
limited in scope, or a proletarian revolutionary conspiracy, Atlantic
in scope (Linebaugh and Rediker 2000:177179). The records of the
events caution us, in any case, about separating the African community
from other ethnic groups too absolutely: overlapping social and
economic networks among African, Native American, Spanish,
English, and Irish New Yorkers were revealed by the investigation.
The primary source is Daniel Horsmandens Journal, published in
1744 (see Lepore 2005). For analyses of the conspiracy, see Davis
(1985), Foote (2004), Launitz-Schrer (1980), Lepore (2005), Stokes
(19151928:4:569575), and Szasz (1967).
of Late Years great Numbers of Negros Indians

and Molatto Slaves have Made it a common
Practice of Buying, Selling and Exposing to
Sale, not Only in houses, out houses & yards but
Likewise in the Publick Streets Within this City,
great Quantities of Boiled Indian Corn, Pears,
Peaches, Apples and other kind of fruit which
pernicious practice is not only Detrimental to the
Masters Mistresses and Owners of such Slaves
in Regard they Absent themselves from their
Service: But is also productive of Encreasing if
not Occasioning many and Dangerous fevours
and other Distempers & Diseases in the Inhabitants in the same city [New York City Common
Council 1905:4:497498].3
Marketers who came into the city from the country
and the Out Ward were exempted from the restriction
and the penalty that accompanied it (public whipping
or a 6 shilling fine payable by the slaveholder), so
long as they had the permission of their legal master.
The law refers not to the citys municipal markets,
but to unregulated venues such as homes and streets
where Africans bought produce for resale. Because
it was already illegal to trade with enslaved persons
without permission, the need for a special ordinance
suggests there had been a noticeable lapse in enforcement.
For discussions of Pinkster in New York, see Epperson (1999:94

96), Hodges (1999:25, 221223), Lepore (2005:158159), Stuckey
(1994), and White (1991:95106). In his novel Satanstoe, James
Fenimore Cooper (1912:6679 [1845]) wrote a fictional account
of a 1757 Pinkster holiday in New York City. The story locates the
celebrations at the upper end of Broadway on the Common, with
whites in attendance as spectators. Because no such public festival is
recorded for the city, it is possible his story was based on oral tradition
from the upper Hudson Valley area.
During the eighteenth century, similar laws were passed in towns
throughout the English colonies, reflecting widespread participation
of the enslaved in local economies.
3
Chapter 7. The Middle Group 151

Table 24. Black Population by Age and Sex, 17371756
Adults
Children
Year
Label in
Census
Male
Female
Male
Female
1737
black
674
609
229
207
1746
black
721
569
419
735
1749
black
651
701
460
556
1756
black
672
695
468
443
Age for
Children
10
15
15
15
Total
1,719
2,444
2,368
2,278
Note: Black adult males include 76 males over the age of 60 in 1746, 41 males over the age of 60 in 1749, and 68 males
over the age of 60 in 1756. Information from Green and Harrington (1932) and U.S. Bureau of the Census (1909).
The Population
Census
The black population of New York grew substantially
from the mid-1730s to the mid-1740s, as census figures indicate a 42percent increase. Children (defined
as 10years and under in 1737 and 15 and under in
1746) account for the increase. Black residents numbered 2,444 in 1746. This was the eighteenth-century
high mark of 20.9percent of the total population.
The distribution by age and sex in 4census years is
shown in Table24.
Imports of enslaved Africans into New York continued from both the Caribbean and Africa during
the mid-1700s, although precise figures are difficult to reconstruct. It is possible that following the
1741 panic, when Africans from the Caribbean were
implicated in the 1741 conspiracy, importation of
captives directly from Africa increased.4 The sense
among New York merchants was that the Caribbean
colonies had been transporting troublesome captives
to the northern colonies, and, in fact, there is evidence
that seasoned insurrectionists from the islands played
a role in the New York conspiracy (Linebaugh and
Rediker 2000:193203). It is also possible that greater
numbers of children, especially young girls, were
brought to the city beginning in the 1740s, owing to
greater demand for domestic labor and anxiety about
insurrection by seasoned men. The preponderance of
girls over boys and of adult men over women in the
Lydon (1978:378, 387388) compiled data showing that 70percent
of captives brought to New York Colony prior to 1742 were imported
from American sources; subsequently, the ratio was almost exactly
reversed. His information from shipping records indicates a marked
increase in the African trade in the late 1740s.
4
1746 census probably reflects these market shifts. As

noted in Chapter13 of Skeletal Biology of the New
York African Burial Ground (Blakey, Rankin-Hill,
etal. 2009), the local urban demand for girls would
be satisfied via the direct African trade.
Mortuary Sample
Nearly half of the burials excavated at the New York
African Burial Ground are placed in the Middle Group
(n=198). Burialsare listed in Table25 and shown
on the site plan in Figures77a77e. In the table, head
angle is the orientation in degrees west of north (discussed in Chapter5). Preservation codes are explained
in Chapter3. An entry of n/a in the coffin column indicates that the bones were severely disturbed, displaced,
or redeposited so that coffin presence/absence could
not be determined. The age and sex profiles for the
mortuary sample are shown in Figures78 and 79. The
age profile carries a caveat: we noted in Chapter5 that
the frequency of child burials in this cohort is higher
than that in the overall skeletal sample and proposed
that some of these burials may actually belong in the
Late-Middle or Late Groups, although there is no way
to so assign them.
Mortuary Material Culture

Adult coffins were hexagonal by definition for the
Middle Group. In contrast, the smaller coffins for
subadults (when identifiable) were hexagonal (33),
rectangular (7), tapered (5), or uncertain but four sided
(7) in shape (see Chapter10). There were 38subadults
buried in coffins for which shape could not be definitively determined. Only three burials without coffins
are assigned to the Middle Group, Burials371, 375,

Table 25. Middle Group Burials
Burial
No.
Age
Category
Low
Age
High
Age
Sex
adult
25
35
male
infant
adult
35
16
adult
17
subadult
19
0.5
Head Angle Grid South Grid East

(degrees)
(feet)
(feet)
Preservation
Code
Coffin
107
n/a
undetermined
101
82.5
hexagonal
45
male
90
89.5
25
hexagonal
50
60
female
67
hexagonal
undetermined
89
83.25
20
hexagonal
subadult
undetermined
108
81.5
20
unidentified
21
subadult
undetermined
87.5
20
rectangular
22
subadult
2.5
4.5
undetermined
90
96.5
-1.5
unidentified
24
subadult
undetermined
92
87.5
rectangular
25
adult
20
24
female
96
87.5
20
unidentified
27
subadult
1.4
undetermined
74
88.5
hexagonal
30
subadult
11
undetermined
92
86
10
hexagonal
31
adult
14
16
undetermined
90
103.5
-1
hexagonal
32
adult
50
60
male
100
86.5
23.5
hexagonal?
35
subadult
10
undetermined
93
87.5
15
hexagonal
39
subadult
undetermined
82
81.75
40
hexagonal
41
adult
undetermined
66
99.5
-11
unidentified
45
subadult
undetermined
86
103.5
-5
hexagonal
46
adult
female?
86
95.5
unidentified
47
adult
35
45
male
94
103.5
hexagonal?
49
adult
40
50
female
82
87.5
40
hexagonal
50
subadult
undetermined
90
87.5
30
hexagonal
53
subadult
0.25
0.75 undetermined
90
87.5
hexagonal
55
subadult
undetermined
93
92.2
hexagonal
56
adult
30
34
female
90
90.5
15
hexagonal?
57
subadult
66
2.8
2.5
4.5
107
0.88
2.16 undetermined
90
87.5
25
hexagonal
infant
0.16 undetermined
90
93.5
25
unidentified
69
adult
30
60
male
82
89
-3.5
y
(no cranium)
hexagonal?
70
adult
35
45
male
90
92.5
10
y
(no cranium)
hexagonal
73
adult
20
30
female?
96
79
10
hexagonal
97
80
15
n
(empty coffin)
hexagonal
74
75
infant
77
subadult
undetermined
97
92.5
34
rectangular
0.67
1.3
undetermined
110
88.5
35
hexagonal

Table 25. Middle Group Burials (continued)
Burial
No.
Age
Category
79
subadult
80
Low
Age
0.25
High
Age
Sex

(degrees)
(feet)
(feet)
Preservation
Code
Coffin
tapered
0.75 undetermined
90
82
subadult
undetermined
88
87.5
40
hexagonal
81
adult
female
90
93
-3
y
(no cranium)
unidentified
82
adult
female
86
93
y
(cranium only)
unidentified
85
subadult
0.25
0.75 undetermined
89
80.5
15
hexagonal
87
subadult
undetermined
90
94
y
(cranium only)
unidentified
90
adult
35
40
female
90
81.5
hexagonal
93
adult
undetermined
85
-3
unidentified
94
subadult
undetermined
80
92.5
47
hexagonal
96
adult
male
71
94.5
47
hexagonal
98
subadult
undetermined
90
81
20
hexagonal
100
subadult
undetermined
90
80.5
20
hexagonal
102
subadult
2.67 undetermined
90
79.5
20
hexagonal
103
subadult
undetermined
86
79.5
20
hexagonal
104
adult
female
77
89.5
61
hexagonal
111
subadult
0.67
1.33 undetermined
73
91.5
53
four sided?
112
subadult
0.25
0.75 undetermined
89
82.5
unidentified
113
adult
114
adult
45
115
adult
116
adult
118
adult
122
adult
126
subadult
3.5
5.5
127
subadult
128
infant
18
25
16
18
1.33
30
40
undetermined
85
91.5
60
unidentified
50
male
100
94.5
91
hexagonal
25
35
female
94
89.5
89
hexagonal
45
55
male
100
95.5
81.5
hexagonal
94.5
55
unidentified
undetermined
18
20
female
86
93
61
hexagonal
undetermined
110
88
80.5
hexagonal
0.67
1.33 undetermined
94
90
95
hexagonal
0.17 undetermined
89
92.5
83
hexagonal
n/a
97
91.5
95
no
(empty coffin)
unidentified
129
130
subadult
undetermined
89
92
56
hexagonal
133
subadult
undetermined
76
96
78
hexagonal
136
subadult
95
86.7
unidentified
142
adult
25
30
female
95
88
90
hexagonal
143
subadult
10
undetermined
111
88
80.5
hexagonal
144
infant
0.17 undetermined
99
88
90
four sided
undetermined

Burial
No.
Age
Category
Low
Age
High
Age
148
adult
12
18
undetermined
93
91.5
149
subadult
undetermined
97
154
adult
25
29
female
88
156
adult
30
60
female
159
adult
25
35
female
160
subadult
161
subadult
163
adult
167
subadult
8.5
169
subadult
5.5
175
adult
189
adult
undetermined
206
subadult
undetermined
212
subadult
213
adult
45
215
infant
218
subadult
0.5
220
subadult
224
subadult
231
subadult
232
subadult
0.5
3.5
18
24
4.5
0.5
Preservation
Code
Coffin
70
hexagonal
88
90
four sided
95.5
75
hexagonal
66.5
115
unidentified
89
73.5
90
hexagonal
undetermined
93
73
98.5
four sided
undetermined
83
74.5
90
rectangular
male?
89
74.5
99
hexagonal
12.5
undetermined
99
86.5
65
hexagonal
9.5
undetermined
114
91.5
81
hexagonal?
72
64.5
unidentified
95.5
65.5
unidentified
75.5
93
rectangular
y
(no cranium)
hexagonal?
5.5
24
28
5.5
infant
239

(degrees)
(feet)
(feet)
male
90
undetermined
85
82.5
55
female
93
84.5
85.5
hexagonal
0.16 undetermined
111
81.5
72.5
four sided?
3.5
undetermined
105
89
73
unidentified
undetermined
95
78
92
tapered
1.33 undetermined
86
77.5
97
four sided
undetermined
77.5
97
four sided
undetermined
77.5
97
unidentified
127
rectangular
55
233
234
Sex
n/a
90
73
0.5
undetermined
107
77.5
96.5
tapered
subadult
1.5
3.5
undetermined
109
83.5
70
tapered
240
subadult
0.88
2.66 undetermined
90
79.5
95.5
hexagonal?
245
subadult
2.5
4.5
undetermined
93
75
85.5
hexagonal
246
subadult
0.5
2.9
undetermined
92
82.5
70
four sided
248
subadult
undetermined
90
71.2
118.5
unidentified
254
subadult
255
14
15
3.5
5.5
undetermined
96
79.5
97.5
unidentified
infant
0.17 undetermined
90
79.3
117.9
hexagonal?
256
adult
40
male
93
77.5
79
hexagonal
258
infant
undetermined
104
85.5
78
four sided
260
undetermined
undetermined
94
84.5
53.5
n/a
265
subadult
268
infant
60
0.5
0.5
undetermined
95
82
120
hexagonal?
0.5
undetermined
96
74.5
125.5
hexagonal?

Burial
No.
Age
Category
270
adult
271
adult
275
Low
Age
High
Age
Sex

(degrees)
(feet)
(feet)
Preservation
Code
Coffin
male
97
84.5
123.5
unidentified
male
103
76.5
65
hexagonal
adult
female?
96
81
50
unidentified
277
subadult
undetermined
92
77.5
51
unidentified
283
subadult
0.67 undetermined
104
76
123
hexagonal
284
adult
21
28
male
86
80.5
115.5
unidentified
285
adult
20
30
female
102
80.5
64
hexagonal
286
subadult
undetermined
89
75
126
hexagonal?
287
adult
male
95
73.5
53
y
(no cranium)
unidentified
288
adult
undetermined
74.5
120
n/a
291
subadult
undetermined
82.5
94
n/a
292
adult
undetermined
72.5
121
unidentified
293
adult
male?
106
82.5
94
hexagonal
294
subadult
undetermined
96
88
86.5
hexagonal
295
adult
50
female
110
82
70
hexagonal
296
infant
0.5
2.9
undetermined
68
84
98
unidentified
298
subadult
0.67
1.33 undetermined
66.5
123
unidentified
300
infant
undetermined
106
76
125.5
hexagonal?
301
adult
undetermined
99
86
100.5
n/a
86
100.5
n/a
45
0.33
4.4
18
0.5
30
57
8.5
20
301A undetermined
undetermined
302
adult
female?
99
88.5
99.5
n/a
303
subadult
0.5
undetermined
100
73.5
76.5
n/a
304
subadult
undetermined
90
81.5
109
tapered
306
adult
28
44
male
88
76.5
125
hexagonal
310
adult
44
52
female
99
75.5
60
hexagonal
312
infant
undetermined
94
75
67
rectangular
315
adult
30
40
female
88
83
127
hexagonal?
318
subadult
7.5
14
undetermined
116
78
144
n/a
320
subadult
undetermined
120
90
251.5
unidentified
321
subadult
undetermined
117
79.5
143
hexagonal
324
adult
25
35
female
90
69
132
hexagonal
326
adult
45
55
male
96
73.5
135
hexagonal
328
adult
40
50
female
88
84.5
241
hexagonal
334
subadult
undetermined
111
89
251
unidentified
335
adult
female
127
84.5
248
hexagonal
25
0.3
35

Burial
No.
Age
Category
Low
Age
336
subadult
0.5
339
High
Age

(degrees)
(feet)
(feet)
Preservation
Code
Coffin
undetermined
92
83
125.5
hexagonal?
subadult
undetermined
86
83
123
unidentified
341
adult
male
103
87.5
229.5
hexagonal
344
adult
male?
87.5
255
unidentified
345
adult
undetermined
74.5
254
n/a
347
subadult
0.5
undetermined
98
73.5
130
hexagonal
348
subadult
undetermined
112
66
138
hexagonal
349
infant
0.5
undetermined
94
72
132
unidentified
350
undetermined
82
133.5
n/a
351
adult
50
60
male
106
84.5
145
hexagonal
353
adult
24
34
male
112
84.5
230
hexagonal
355
adult
undetermined
74.5
235
n/a
356
subadult
undetermined
128
84.5
248
shared
358
adult
female?
126
89.5
230
unidentified
359
subadult
undetermined
95
84.5
127.5
unidentified
360
subadult
undetermined
75.5
235
unidentified
365
adult
female
195
79.5
257.5
unidentified
366
adult
34
62
undetermined
118
78
224
hexagonal
367
adult
25
35
female?
72
130
n/a
368
subadult
10.5
13.5
undetermined
95
80.5
246.5
unidentified
370
subadult
undetermined
75
82
146.5
hexagonal?
371
adult
25
35
female
115
69
235
no coffin
372
adult
25
35
female
81
235
n/a
374
infant
72
132.5
unidentified
375
adult
16
74.5
253
no coffin
378
undetermined
75.5
235
n
(not excavated)
unidentified
379
adult
30
40
male
109
71.5
215
hexagonal
380
adult
40
60
male
98
85
241
hexagonal
383
adult
14
18
female
79
245
hexagonal
384
adult
25
45
female
80
91.5
248
hexagonal
385
adult
40
60
female
121
86
251.5
hexagonal
390
adult
25
35
male
94
71.5
140
n/a
393
infant
- 0.17
84
211
hexagonal?
394
adult
16
59.5
185
n/a
396
subadult
82.5
224
hexagonal
25
Sex
35
undetermined
0.25 undetermined
18
female
93
120
undetermined
6.5
0.17 undetermined
25
8.5
119
undetermined
undetermined
108

Burial
No.
Age
Category
Low
Age
High
Age
397
adult
30
40
female
398
adult
25
35
undetermined
399
infant
400
adult
25
403
adult
405

(degrees)
(feet)
(feet)
100
Preservation
Code
Coffin
87
229
hexagonal
93
255.5
n/a
78
213
rectangular
65.5
130
hexagonal
106
35
male
85
39
65
male
113
93
255.5
unidentified
subadult
10
undetermined
119
83.9
211.8
hexagonal?
406
infant
undetermined
280
68.25
253.5
hexagonal?
408
adult
male?
79.5
158
n/a
n/a
410
adult
female
69.5
178
hexagonal
412
infant
undetermined
78.5
218.5
unidentified
414
adult
39
59
male
112
74
165
unidentified
415
adult
35
55
male
99
81
215
hexagonal
417
subadult
64.5
165
unidentified
418
adult
30
55
male
106
64.5
163
unidentified
419
adult
48
62
male
117
71.5
206.5
hexagonal
420
adult
35
45
male
69.5
186.5
n/a
422
undetermined
undetermined
86.5
212.5
unidentified
n/a
67
162
n
(not excavated)
unidentified
76
220
n/a
n/a
0.5
14.5
423
95
undetermined
424
adult
undetermined
425
adult
female
107
79.1
253
n
(not excavated)
hexagonal
427
adult
16
20
male?
91
69.5
179
hexagonal
428
adult
40
70
female
95
66.5
147.5
unidentified
429
adult
undetermined
64.5
215
n
(not excavated)
unidentified
n/a
84.5
215
n
(not excavated)
unidentified
430
undetermined
9.5
0.3
Sex
431
adult
undetermined
79.5
162
unidentified
433
adult
undetermined
79.5
160.5
n/a
434
undetermined
undetermined
79.5
155
no coffin
In the Sex column, a question mark indicates a probable assignment
Figure 77a. Excavated Middle Group burials (prepared for the United States General Services Administration).
Figure 77c. Middle Group burials, west-central area (prepared for the United States General Services Administration).
Figure 77d. Middle Group burials, east-central and Lot 18 areas (prepared for the United States General Services Administration).
Figure 78. Age distribution, Middle Group. White bars indicate individuals whose age could not be determined
(includes only burials from which remains were recovered).
Figure 79. Adult sex distribution, Middle Group.

and 434. Although Burial375 is placed in this group
by default, there being no way of distinguishing it
as either early or late, Burial371 can be assigned with
more confidence owing to the fact that it was found
2feet beneath another adult interment. Both of these
coffinless burials are located in the southeastern site
area, and both had associated artifacts of particular
note. Burial434 was never completely excavated.
Pins were found with 103 of the Middle Group
burials, including 62children (see Chapter11). Eleven
individuals from the Middle Group had evidence or
possible evidence for clothing (see Chapter12). These
11 represent only 7.5percent of the 145burials that
had adequate preservation for such evidence. A child
(in Burial22) and a woman (in Burial213) had aglets
(tiny metal tubes that enclose the ends of laces and
cords), which probably indicate clothing or perhaps
shrouds tied with laces. The men interred in Burials326
and 415 clearly wore trousers, the first having a row of
copper-alloy domed buttons indicating a trouser fly
and the second having 13copper-alloy buttons at knees
and hips, representing breeches. The remaining buttons
were found singly or in pairs on five men, one woman,
and one adult of undetermined sex. Cuff links were
found at the left wrist of the man in Burial341.
Jewelry (see Chapter13) was scarce, with only four
burials containing items that appear to have been worn
as adornment. The woman in Burial115 wore a ring
with a plain band on the third finger of her left hand,
and the woman in Burial310 had a ring with blue
glass insets, also on her left hand (it is not clear which
finger). A third woman (Burial371) had two enamel
cuff link faces beneath her left upper arm. They had a
turquoise ground and white-and-pink surface decoration. A young child (Burial254) had an exceptional
item of adornment, a small silver pendant on a loop,
similar to an earring, which may have been strung and
worn at the neck. Glass beads from unknown contexts
were recovered with Burials428 (2specimens) and
434 (1specimen).
Other material culture from Middle Group burials
included a small glass sphere associated with Burial410
and a small crystal cluster with Burial55; shells in the
coffin of Burial22 and on the coffin lids of Burials348,
352, and 365; and several nails that may have been
deliberately placed in coffins. A clay ball (roughly the
size of a marble) encircled with a decorative copper
band was found with possible evidence for a cloth or
leather pouch in Burial375. This unique artifact is
discussed in Chapter14, along with the glass sphere
and the crystals.
Spatial Distribution
Burials assigned to the Middle Group were located
throughout the excavated site except north of the fence
line. For ease of discussion, the site is broken down
into subareas, although these are defined more on the
basis of preservation factors than spatial distribution
of graves. The western area (see Figure77b) is west
of grid line 45East, a line where a distinction can be
seen between relatively sparse interments to the west
and very dense burials to the east. This distinction
may be the result of poor preservation to the rear of
Lot13, although topography probably played a role
in the siting of graves, and there may have been a
slope here that made it less desirable for interments
(see Chapter3). The west-central area (see Figure77c)
extends from grid line 45East to grid line 110East.
Burialsare relatively dense within this subarea, but
the apparent sudden falling off of burial frequency east
of here is probably a result of poor preservation, in
particular because of a large construction disturbance
at the rear of Lot16. Again, we believe the original
topography was important in the selection of grave
sites, as this subarea was relatively flat. The area east
of Lot16 between grid lines 110 and 150East is the
east-central area (see Figure77d). Here burials are
again quite dense, and this was probably another relatively level area within the cemetery. Farther east, the
rear of Lot18 (see Figure77d) saw particularly heavy
disturbance and is considered separately. Finally, the
southeast area (see Figure77e) in and surrounding the
pottery dump is discussed. We know that excavation
was incomplete in the eastern part of the site, and burials once extended westward and northward of those
exposed in this last area (i.e., there is a false appearance
of a separate concentration here).
The distribution of burial orientations in the Middle
Group burials is shown in Figures54 (Chapter 5) and
77a77e. Overall, there were more southwesterly
oriented burials (relative to our grid) in this period
than in the earlier group. It is possible that the fence
was present during part of our middle period and that
graves were oriented to it, but the town palisadein
place from 1745 through approximately 1760may
have been an even more notable landmark forming a
roughly east-west axis by which to orient graves. It is
also possible that more burials were oriented according
to the position of the sun at sunset because of stronger
enforcement of the law restricting the time that funerals could be conducted to daylight hours.
Figure 80. Detail (5 West to 25 East) of the

southwestern corner of the site plan (see
Figure 7, pocket map) showing burials
from all temporal groups. Middle Group
burials are shown in color. Grave clusters
mentioned in the text are circled.
It seems possible that the spatial syntax governing

the placement of a grave included some standard of
distance between individual interments. Even the
graves of children are sometimes spaced apart from
others, which suggests that at times the locations were
selected not on the basis of familial/social relationships but on expedience and/or in reference to a spatial
system (implicit or explicit) within which individual
plots were appropriate. There were eight childrens
graves in the Middle Group that appear to have been
placed apart from other interments: Burials39, 77, and
80 (see Figure77b) and Burials130, 258, 245, and 304
(see Figure77c). In addition, Burials128 and 169 were
separate from others in the Middle Group; however,
they overlay Early Group Burial177, and deliberate
placement with that adult cannot be ruled out. Grave
diggers may have sited burials with reference to each
other, leaving a certain minimum amount of space
between, unless a particular relationship dictated that
a grave should join or overlap an existing burial.
Overall, Middle Group burials were dispersed over
much more of the excavated portion of the cemetery
than were Early Group burials. It is possible that intervening areas between spatial concentrations of early
burials were gradually filled in during subsequent
decades. Although older locations were also reused,
resulting in some superimposed burials, there appears
to have been some effort to maintain the identity or
integrity of early graves during the middle period.

Thus, more than half of the early burials, including
Burials18, 23, 68, 29, 78, 34, 38, 48, 84 and 83, 182,
120, 202, 121, 282, 200, 221/226, 177, 308, 416, 426,
404, 387, 388, 432, and 340, were left undisturbed
by Middle Group interments, although some subsequently would be disturbed by Late-Middle or Late
Group burials.
The Western Area

Middle Group burials in the western part of the excavated site (see Figure77b) are found in several clusters.
Some of the clusters include burials that are thought to
belong to earlier or later temporal groups, as discussed
in Chapter6, and in order to illustrate this, Figure80
shows burials from all temporal groups in this area
of the site (compare to Figure77b).
One cluster includes Burials73, 90, 79 and 8 (top left
in Figure80). These are located at the rear of Lot12,
just south of the projected fence line that once marked
the cemeterys north side. Burials73 and 90 were of
women in their 20s and late 30s respectively, and the
infants in Burials79 and 8 may have been placed
deliberately with the older of the two women. It is
also possible that a later burial, Burial1, which lay at
a higher elevation and is assigned to the Late Group,
was placed deliberately with these graves. The recorded

stratigraphy suggests, however, that the surface of the
earlier graves may have been covered over, obscuring
their locations, before Burial1 was interred.
To the east of this group, a second cluster can be
viewed as a string or line of burials, running parallel to
the south side of the projected fence alignment. These
graves, which include Burials74, 85, 98, 100, 102,
and 103 (top right, Figure80), belonged to children
or infants (although no remains were recovered from
the child-sized coffin in Burial74).
Burial53 lay at the foot of Middle Group Burial69,
and this association well may have been deliberate,
but the childs grave also overlay the head of an
Early Group grave, Burial68 (left center, Figure80).
Burial55, likewise, was near the foot of Middle Group
Burial81 but also at the head of Early Group Burial68.
Clusters where Middle Group (and later) burials may
be associated with earlier graves have been discussed
in Chapter6. These include
Burials24 and 27, infant graves among earlier
Burials23, 68, and 78 (center, Figure80);
Burials54, 81, 67, 60, 46 and 22, which may have
been deliberately placed above early Burials 29
and 88 (left center, Figure80);
Burials25 and 32 (described in the section on
spatial distribution in this chapter), 35, 19, and 21,
placed above Early Group Burials44, 48 and 52
(at right in Figure80).
Also discussed in Chapter6 were Burials22 (of a
child) and 46 (of an adult woman), which may have
been placed deliberately with Early Group Burial29,
a probable male adult. Burial46, although included
here with the Middle Group, also may in fact be an
early burial (its coffin shape is difficult to determine). The child, between 2 and 4years old, was in
a possibly hexagonal coffin that had been placed so
as to straddle the two underlying adult burials. An
east-west row of cobblestones, 34feet above the
Burial29 coffin, separated these three burials from
other interments to the south. The cobbles, averaging about 0.3feet in diameter, may have formed a
boundary marker between grave groups. South of
the line were Burial47, of a man of 3545years;
Burial31, of an adolescent; and Burial45, of a child
of 24years. The man and the adolescent may have
been placed in a single large grave, although this is
impossible to determine with certainty. The child was
buried later, its grave overlapping the head end of the
mans grave. A thin slab of stone was found oriented
vertically above the upper-body portion of Burial47
and was identified as a possible grave marker (see

Figure59 in Chapter 5).
To the south of Burial 103 and Burials 98 and 100,
Burials17, 35, and 56 lay in what may have been a
row, fairly evenly spaced from north to south. It
is not possible to determine whether this apparent
alignment was deliberate. Each of these graves was
adjacent to or overlay an earlier burial. Their spacing,
and that of Burials9, 77, 80, 49, 39, and the cluster
consisting of Burials50, 57, and 66 (see Figure77b),
suggest the positioning of burials in plots as mentioned above for the Middle Group.
The West-Central Area

Several clusters can be discerned among Middle Group
interments in this part of the site (see Figure77c). One
cluster centers on Middle Group Burials96 and 94,
an adult and child in a shared grave, located within
Republican Alley behind the southeast corner of the
Lot13 basement (Figure81). Surrounding and overlying this grave were those of several more children,
Burials42, 64, 61, and 91. Their placement is suggestive of deliberate association with the double grave.
(Although they postdate Burials96 and 94 based on
superposition and were placed in our Late-Middle
temporal group, it is possible these children all belong
together in the main Middle Group.) A final interment, Burial95, actually truncated the entire eastern
portion of Burial96, suggesting that the earlier grave
had been forgotten or was disregarded by the grave
diggers by the time the later grave was dug. Because
of this, Burial95 has been placed in the Late Group
for this analysis.
Another tight clustering of burials includes Middle
Group Burials215, 246, 295 and 239 (at left center in
Figure82). Burial215 was placed in the same grave
as Burial295, although possibly slightly later. All
of these overlay an earlier grave, Burial280, and in
turn were overlain by a later grave, Burial229. Early
Group burials are concentrated in this area of the
cemetery, including several that had no superimposed
interments, as though they had been deliberately kept
undisturbed. Because of this, initially, the placement
of a cluster of later (Middle Group) graves immediately above Burial280 seemed as though it might
have been deliberate. However, the grave of shared
Burials295 and 215 truncated both the north side of
Burial280 and the western portion of another early
burial (Burial279), suggesting that the early burials
either were not known or not considered at the time
Figure 81. Detail (4155 East and 9196

South) of west-central area of the site
plan (see Figure 7, pocket map) showing
burials from all temporal groups. The
cluster containing Middle Group Burials
96 and 94 is circled.
Figure 82. Detail (65100 East and 7098 South) of west-central area of the site plan (see Figure 7, pocket map) showing
burials from all temporal groups. Middle Group burials are shown in color. Clusters mentioned in the text are circled.
of the later interments. Instead, we suggest that it was

Middle Group Burial295 that anchored the cluster of
childrens burials from the Middle Group and later.
Three graves, Burials133, 154, and 116, are clustered together near the south edge of Republican Alley
(bottom center, Figure82); their association is the more
striking because of the gap of several feet between these
burials and their neighbors to the north. Burial116 was
of a man between 45 and 55, Burial154 of a woman
in her late twenties, and Burial 133 of a child of
12years. The woman and child were buried after
the man.
Another cluster includes Burials142, 144, and 149

(a triple interment of a woman in her late twenties with
two children) and Burials115 and 294 (lower right
quadrant, Figure82). Burial115, adjacent to the south
and parallel to the woman and children, held a woman
between 25 and 35years old; her grave appears to have
been dug slightly later in time than the other. The
stratigraphic relationship of Burial294 to the others
is impossible to reconstruct, but it probably was the
first interment of the three.
Nearby, just to the southeast, lay Burials124/129
and Burial127. No skeletal remains were found in

the coffin of Burial129, which was adult sized (a
few skeletal elements found in its grave fill were
designated Burial124). Burial127, which held an
infant, was immediately adjacent to the central north
side of Burial129, and the two may have been placed
together deliberately.
An instance of an adult with children probable cointerment assigned to the Middle Group is Burials159,
161 and 206 (top right, Figure82). As noted in Chapter5, this group comprised a woman of 2535years
old and two infants or young children, who were
placed on either side of the foot end of her grave.
A cluster of overlapping graves of children was
excavated at the eastern edge of the rear of Lot15,
in an area severely disturbed by construction activity
during the fieldwork (upper right, Figure82). The
interments included Burials 160, 231, 232, 224;
Burials 254 and 240 slightly to the south (in an
apparent shared grave); and Burial220 slightly to
the west. Adult graves lay immediately to the north
(Burial163), and immediately above (Burial207).
The child burials are placed in the Middle Group, but
their possible earlier assignment is noted in Chapter6, where we discussed the problematic temporal
assignment of Burial207. In any case, Burial207
was clearly later than the childrens graves it overlay.
It is unusual at the New York African Burial Ground
site for an adult grave to be above childrens graves.
The underlying graves may not have been known to
the Burial207 grave digger. Alternatively, this adult
may have been placed here on purpose, having had
some relation to the children. A partially intact late
childs grave (Burial208) and disturbed adult remains
from another adult grave (Burial204) were found
in positions overlying Burial207 and the childrens
graves.
Burials291, 293/269, and 296 may have formed
another grave cluster (right center, Figure82). Burial
296 consisted only of child-sized coffin remains,
Burial291 contained displaced infant bones, and
Burial293 held an adult, possibly male. A later grave,
Burial267, disturbed Burial293 and presumably also
the infant Burial291.
268, and 286 (see Figure77d, lower left). The latter

two burials consist of an infant and a child between
4.4 and 8.5years of age that appear to be in a shared
grave that was dug before that of Burial306which
was not placed above the infant graves but adjacent
to themfollowed by Burials383 and 300.
Childrens graves also lay to the east of these burials, and it is possible the grouping actually extended
eastward to Burial326, which held a man who died
at 4555years of age. The man had filed teeth, as did
the probable woman represented by a displaced cranium in nearby Burial367. It seems likely these two
individuals were originally interred in close proximity
to one another. In the case of Burial367, isotope and
lead analysis pointed to African birth. Burial374,
which held an infant or newborn, was found within the
grave of Burial326, on the north side near the head.
Other childrens graves lay above and just to the west
of Burial374. These were Burials349, 347 and 233
(the latter consisting only of a tiny rectangular box,
with no extant human remains).
South of the Burial306 cluster was an area crowded
with graves, possibly representing another extended
grouping (see Figure77d). The burials include, on
the west, Burial284 (of a man in his twenties); on
the south, Burial270 (of another man, age undetermined); and on the east, Burial315 (of a woman
between 30 and 40years old). Graves of infants and
children lay between, above, and beneath these. In
another unusual instance of an adult burial overlying a child burial, Burial315 lay immediately above
and perfectly aligned with the infant in Burial336.
Burial339, partially destroyed by construction activity
in this location, and the shared grave of Burials255
and 265 lay in the midst of these others.
Other burials in the east-central area were apart
from each other and from these clusters, suggesting,
as noted, that the grave diggers at the African Burial
Ground might have relied on a mental template when
placing graves, which would have included an offset
between plots.
The East-Central Area
The rear portion of historic Lot18 (see Figure77d)

suffered disturbance from multiple twentieth-century
construction features, including an elevator shaft and
a series of concrete footings, and many graves were
probably destroyed in this area. The area was never
fully excavated, however, and, presumably, graves
remain intact below and adjacent to those that were
Grouped burials, what we have been referring to as

clusters, are few in this part of the site (see Figure77d). One, with an adult and several children/
infants, includes Burials306 (this contained the adult,
a man between 28 and 44years of age), 300, 283,
The Lot 18 Area

exposed by archaeologists, which numbered 12. All
were assigned to the Middle Group by default, except
for Burial404, which had a tapered coffin and was
assigned to the Early Group, and Burial413, which had
a piece of creamware (dating no earlier than 1760) in
its shaft and was dated to the Late-Middle Group.
Owing to the partial excavation and the degree of
disturbance, an analysis of spatial patterning is not
possible. It is possible that Burials410 (of a woman
of undetermined age who had a small amber-colored
glass sphere in her grave) and 427 (of a young man
in his late teens) were purposely placed adjacent to
one another, as the graves were aligned and very
close together.
The Southeast Area

As previously noted, colonial New Yorks mid-century
palisade wall may have been used, along with the
direction of sunset, to orient burials along a general
east-west axis. This hypothesis is strengthened by the
observation that head-to-west Middle Group burials
in the southeastern part of the excavated cemetery
(see Figure77e) have a strong southwesterly trend in
orientation (as do Late-Middle Group burials in this
area). This is where the palisade, oriented southwest
to northeast, passed closest to the excavated site (no
doubt along the ridge of Pot-Bakers Hill), and
this location would have been most prominent in
the landscape as grave diggers worked. There were
other nonburial site features excavated in this area
that also raked southwest to northeast, including the
pottery-waste midden and a filled-in trench, designated
Feature163. It is possible that the trench, midden, and
burials ran parallel to the original slope of the ground
here, just as the palisade wall would have.
The function of this 1-foot-deep trench is not
known, and it may have been a natural depression.
Artifacts within the trench do not lend themselves to
firm dating but did include kiln waste (Janowitz and
Cheek 2003). It separated Burials419, 379, 429, and
382 (the latter assigned to our Early Group) from the
rest of the burials in this area. This part of the site
was never fully excavated, and it is likely many other
interments are located to the north of the trench.
A few burials lay southeast of the stoneware dump
(see discussion in Chapter4), slightly lower in elevation
than the burials that were within or at the edges of the
dump, and contained no fragments of stoneware whatsoever. This loose grouping includes Burials384, 320,
and 334 from the Middle Group, along with Burial361
from the Early Group (near lower right corner of Figure77e). The complete absence of kiln waste from
these graves is difficult to explain except by positing
that they predate the dump. As discussed in Chapter4,
Burial384 is problematic because although it is devoid
of stoneware and aligned adjacent and parallel to early
Burial361, its hexagonal coffin suggests it is later than
its neighbor. Burial384 and the side-by-side childrens
Burials320 and 334 all may have been placed deliberately in association with the early grave.
Although there are several paired interments in
the southeast subarea, clusters are not discerned.
Shown on Figure77e (moving left to right), the pairs
include Burials393 and 405 (of an infant with a child
of 610years); Burials341 and 397 (of a man and a
woman); Burials328 and 380 (a man and a woman
both over 40years old, possibly interred together,
although not at the same time; and Burials335 and
356, of a woman with an infant cradled in her arm.
A unique pair (not sharing a grave) was formed by
Burials383 and 368, the latter lying perpendicular to
the former such that the heads overlapped.
Unique and Unusual Burials

Burials25 and 32: A Violent Death
and a Shared Grave
The remains in Burial25 were of a woman whose age
was calculated as 2024years. Lodged beneath her
fourth left rib was a lead musket ball, slightly flattened
(Figure83). Her coffin had been placed atop that of
an older man aged 5060 (Burial32) and precisely
aligned with it, so that a deliberate co-interment is
postulated (Figure84).
The bullets point of entry cannot be definitively
determined, although there was a large hole at the
center of the shattered left scapula, and it is possible
the woman was shot through her upper left back. Bone
fractures suggest that she also had suffered a bluntforce trauma to the face; an oblique fracture of her
lower right arm had been caused by twisting. A small
trace of new bone around the fractures suggested that
she lived for a short while after the fractures occurred
(no more than a few days). The womans skeleton
showed scarring on each ulna (one of the two lower
arm bones), where the muscles attached at the elbows,
suggesting habitual activity using these muscles (see
Wilczak etal. 2009 [Chapter11 of Skeletal Biology
of the New York African Burial Ground]).
Figure 83. In situ photograph of musket ball lodged in rib

cage of the woman in Burial 25 (photograph by Dennis
Seckler).
Figure 84. In situ photographs of left, Burial 32, and right, Burial 25. The burials may have shared a grave,
and both were disturbed by the construction of a foundation wall on Lot 13. The heads are to the west. The
ruler alongside Burial 25 is measured in feet (photographs by Dennis Seckler).
Figure 85. In situ photograph of Burial 175, bones

placed atop the coffin of Burial 257. Ruler laid alongside
the burial is marked in feet; north is to the right
Burial 175: A Secondary Burial

Burial175 consisted of bones found in the grave of
Late Group Burial257 (Figure85). Although completely disarticulated, the skeletal elements from
Burial175 were almost all accounted for and were
identified as those of a man between the ages of 24 and
28. One possible scenario is of grave diggers coming
upon the earlier grave, removing all of the bones, and
then carefully replacing them atop the new coffin.
Although the disturbance may have been accidental,
another possibility is that these remains represent a
deliberate exhumation followed by secondary burial.
In this case, the bones may have been placed within
the grave of a recently deceased relative.
Burials74 and 129: Empty Coffins

There were no human remains found in the coffin
excavated as Burial74. The grave was located in the
far western part of the site, at the rear of Lot12 (see
Figure77b). The shaft outline was rectangular in
shape, and the coffin was hexagonal, with its head to
the west. It was approximately 4.5feet long, suggesting

that it had held a child. Nails were recorded in situ
around the perimeter of the coffin, although only at
the bottom. Because this coffin was of a probable
child, it is possible the skeletal remains had simply
decayed, leaving no trace; however, judging by other
child burials at the site, we expect that some teeth
would have been preserved in situ.
Burial129 also contained no skeletal remains.
There were scattered adult skeletal remains (three
teeth, an occipital fragment of the skull, and the distal
end of a humerus) recovered from the grave-fill soil,
and excavators hypothesized that when Burial129
was interred it completely displaced another burial
(designated Burial124). It is not possible to determine
whether one or two burials are actually represented.
The coffin lid recorded as belonging to Burial129
was fairly well preserved, however, and it is difficult
to envision how or why the remains were removed
from within it and somehow scattered. The coffin
was first drawn as four sided, slightly tapered toward
the foot (east) end; however, the final burial drawing
represents the coffin as hexagonal in shape.
As discussed in Chapter6, either the deceased were
removed from their coffins after interment, or empty
coffins were interred intentionally. Secondary burial
and grave robbing are possible scenarios in the first
case, although burial of an empty coffin might suggest adherence to a religious practice or an attempt
at deception.
South-Headed and East-Headed Burials

Burials383 and 365, south-headed womens burials
in the southeast area of the site (see Figure77e, left
center), were discussed in Chapter5. The orientation
of the head of the infant in Burial406, also located
at the far eastern edge of site, was toward the east. The
coffin shape was unclear: it appeared to be six sided, but
the shoulder was not obvious. There is a possibility
that the position of the infant within the coffin was not
known to those who placed it in the grave, and thus
that the unusual orientation was accidental.
Burials142, 144, and 149: A Triple Grave

In this grave, a woman between 25 and 30years of
age was buried along with two infants, one whose
age was calculated at less than 2months, and one
thought to have been between 6 and 12months old

at death. The three were in separate coffins. The
tiny coffins of the children, Burials144 and 149,
had been placed so as to both fit on the top of the
womans (Figure86).
Either all three were interred at the same time, or
the infants were buried together after the woman.
In the other two instances at the New York African
Burial Ground where a woman shared a grave with
an infant (Burials12 and 14 and Burials 335 and
356), the infant had been placed within the coffin
of the adult.
Figure 86. In situ photograph of Burials 142, 144, and 149. The
outlines of the individual coffins are indicated. Ruler alongside the
womans coffin is marked in feet; north is to the right (photograph
by Dennis Seckler).
Chapter 8
The Late-Middle Group

The Late-Middle Group consists of burials that have

been distinguished from the main group because of
stratigraphic relationships or because artifacts found
with them are datable to the final third of the eighteenth century. It is possible that there is some overlap
between the Late-Middle and the Late Groups, defined
as post-1776. Nevertheless, in order to keep those
burials that are most securely assignable to the later
period (see Chapter9) analytically distinct, we have
separated out a Late-Middle cohort and for convenience use the start of the Revolutionary War as the
end date. We use 1760 as an approximate beginning
date for Late-Middle burials, although some overlap
between the Middle and Late-Middle Groups is likely
because in many cases temporal-group assignment
is based solely on stratigraphic position. Relatively
few burials (n=58) are assigned to the Late-Middle
Group.
A sketch of the town and its population precedes
the presentation of the Late-Middle Group mortuary
sample. The material culture, spatial distribution, and
some unique and unusual burials assigned to this group
are then discussed.
The Town
This period opens with the French and Indian, or Seven
Years, War (17541763), over the course of which
thousands of soldiers were quartered in the city and
thousands of sailors manned ships in the harbor (for
a description of the city in these years, see Burrows
and Wallace [1999:165222]). New barracks to house
the troops had to be constructed, and the buildings
were sited in the northern part of the town Commons
just south of the African Burial Ground. The citys
merchants prospered during and after the war. Following the war the growing trade of the port and the
marketing of goods that began to flow to the colonies

as a result of the Industrial Revolution in England fed
the local economy and the fortunes of the local elite;
artisans also benefited from a boom in construction
during and after the war. The town continued its
northward growth, although the fashionable families
remained downtown.
Residential development along Broadway began to
encroach upon the western side of the burial ground
during these years. The town is best depicted on the
Ratzer Map of 1767 (see Figure20 in Chapter 2)
for the Late-Middle burial cohort. A composite map
(covering the entire period 17301770) prepared for
the book Gotham (Burrows and Wallace 1999:206) is
also useful for locating streets, churches, and public
buildings throughout the city. Isaac Teller (one of the
heirs of the Van Borsum Patent) built three houses
along Broadway near present-day Chambers Street
sometime between 1760 and 1765, and two other
houses stood to the north of these. Tellers fence,
reportedly with a locked gate, also went up in this
period (see Chapters2 and 4). Buildings that may
have been associated with the Campbell pottery abutted the cemetery on the northwest along the property
line; buildings that may have been part of the Crolius/
Remmey pottery operation were farther to the east,
also along the property line. On the town Commons
just south of the burial ground, a jail and a cemetery
for the Almshouse were erected in 1757; in 1775, the
Bridewell went up. Although this part of town was no
longer remote, it was still marginal in a social sense,
as it was characterized by a concentration of public
institutions for the criminal, the homeless, the insane,
and the impoverished, not to mention the place of
execution.
As neighborhoods moved northward, churches
also appeared in the northern precincts (see Rothschild 1990:2580). Many churches had at least small

numbers of black congregants by this time. An important development was the founding of the Methodist
Church in New York, the first meeting of which was
held in 1766. Its permanent home was built in 1768.
The Methodists welcomed blacks and were antislavery.
The black membership in the beginning included small
numbers of mainly enslaved men and women, but
reports from the early 1770s suggest that the numbers
of blacks who came to hear the Methodist preachers
grew quickly (Walls 1974:3940).
Complete segregation and restrictions on full participation by blacks within the churches was the norm,
however. At John Street, as at the other churches,
blacks sat in the loft and entered by a separate stair,
and black members met in separate Negro classes led
by white men (John Street Methodist Church Archives,
New York, Class Rolls, 17851790, Record No.223,
Book1A [old]; Walls 1974). Segregation extended to
the churchyards. Burial records survive for this period
for the Reformed Dutch; Anglican (Trinity as well as
St. Pauls and St. Georges Chapels); Lutheran (Trinity, Christ, and United); Moravian; Baptist; and German Reformed churches of Manhattan, and of those
examined, only the Dutch church recorded the burial
of blacks in the 1760sjust three individuals, and
even for these the location of the burials is not known
(New York Genealogical and Biographical Society,
Burial Register of the Reformed Dutch Church in
the City of New York, 17271804). In 1773, Trinity
(Anglican) Churchs black membership was substantial enough to warrant some provision for burials, and
the church established its own small African cemetery
at the corner of Church and Reade Streets (just one
block west of the African Burial Ground). Trinity
also allowed the 1774 burial of an enslaved woman
named Maryarranged and paid for by her master
Evert Banckerat the English churchyard (Trinity), suggesting the occasional paternalistic gesture
(House Expense Book of Evert Bancker, cited in Foote
[1991:146]). It is possible other blacks were interred
in elite family vaults or plots as well, but there is no
evidence for the general practice.
The importation of captives continued down to the
eve of the Revolution, with the 1760s and 1770s seeing
the greatest volume of direct trade between New York
and Africa. Doubtless a high proportion of Africanborn people entered the local black community (Lydon
1978:378381). It was in March 1762 that merchant
John Watts (1928:31) wrote that captives for the New
York market must be young the younger the better
if not quite Children. Two large shipments of capThe New York African Burial Ground
tives direct from the continent, a total of 196persons,

arrived at the city docks in 1763, and at least 59 more
African-born captives were recorded between 1768
and 1772 (Lydon 1978:382383).
The Population
Census
After a slight drop from the 1740s to 1750s, the black
population of New York City grew substantially again
between 1756 and 1771 (Table26). The 38percent
increase was accounted for mainly by adults and by
more women than men, with the adult sex ratio dropping to 85.9 in 1771.
The adult male category included 68men over
60years of age in 1756 and 42 over 60 in 1771. This
absolute and proportional drop in elderly men may
reflect natural attrition accompanied by increased
importation of younger men. As a proportion of the
citys total population, blacks dropped to 14.3percent,
outstripped by accelerating European growth (presumably through immigration and natural increase).
Mortuary Sample
The 58burials assigned to the Late-Middle Group are
listed in Table27, and their distribution within the
excavated portion of the cemetery is shown on the
site plan in Figures87a87e. In the table, head angle
is the orientation in degrees west of north (discussed
in Chapter5). Preservation codes are explained in
Chapter3. An entry of n/a in the coffin column indicates that the bones were severely disturbed, displaced,
or redeposited so that coffin presence/absence could
not be determined. Age and sex profiles are shown in
Figures88 and 89.
As explained in Chapter5, we believe that subadults are underrepresented in the age profile because
childrens burials that might actually belong in the
Late-Middle Group were buried in, above, or near
existing graves from earlier periods, and such childrens burials cannot be distinguished.

Only three burials assigned to the Late-Middle Group
were without coffins, Burials357, 377, and 391. All
three may in fact belong with the Late Group, which
Chapter 8 . The Late-Middle Group 175

Adults
Children
Year
Label in
Census
Male
Female
Male
Female
1756
black
672
695
468
443
1771
black
932
1,085
568
552
Age for
Children
15
15
Total
2,278
3,137
Note: Information from Green and Harrington (1932) and U.S. Bureau of the Census (1909).
had most of the other coffinless interments. However,

lacking additional evidence, such as stratigraphic
superposition, spatial association, or late artifacts,
we have kept them with the middle period graves,
thus avoiding the tautology of placing them in the
Late Group solely on the basis of having no coffins.
It should be noted, however, that shifting these burials to the Late Group would enhance that cohorts
distinctiveness (for example, two of the three are
men, which matches the skewed sex distribution of
the Late Group).
Coffins of adult burials in the Late-Middle Group
were hexagonal except for those in Burials333 and
392, which were rectangular. These were the only
unambiguously rectangular adult coffins excavated at
the site. Coffins of children and infants were hexagonal (9), rectangular (1), tapered (2), and four sided but
uncertain as to rectangular or tapered (1). Four were
unidentifiable owing to poor preservation.
Four of the five coffins at the New York African
Burial Ground that were either clearly or probably
decorated (in Burials101, 176, 222, and 332) have
been assigned to the Late-Middle Group (the fifth,
a possibly decorated coffin in Burial252, has been
assigned to the Late Group). This may reflect changing coffin style and perhaps indicates that by the third
quarter of the eighteenth century, in some cases coffins were being displayed at the deceaseds home or
graveside. However, we stress the small number of
decorated coffins and also would caution that some
of these burials Late-Middle Group assignment is
based on the decorations themselves: tacks forming
the lid adornment were of a type manufactured in
England beginning in the 1760s (see Chapter10 for
further discussion of coffins and hardware). All of
the individuals in decorated coffins were identified
as adult males or probable males. Burial101 had a
coffin with a heart-shaped design formed from tacks;
the design has been identified as a possible Sankofa
symbol. The coffin in Burial176 had tacks edging the
lid and six handles with back plates, each with cut-out
<> shapes. The coffin in Burial222 also apparently

had a tack design on the lid, although it was disturbed
and could not be reconstructed. Burial332 held a coffin with initials and a number formed in tacks. These
coffins are illustrated in the section on unique and
unusual burials in this chapter and in Chapter10.
Pins were found with 34 of the individuals in the
Late-Middle Group. Pins were in 70.2 percent of
the 47graves considered well enough preserved to
expect them and in 1other burial (Burial319), where
preservation was very poor but pin fragments were
recovered with the bone. Men, women and children
were among the 34. By contrast, only 4 (8.3percent)
of the graves, all of men, had clear evidence for clothing. Burial10 contained 13 copper-alloy buttons (8
whole; 5 with shanks only) in positions indicative of
breeches and a jacket. Burial238 had a bone button
back that was recovered from the cervical vertebrae
(neck) of its occupant, along with octagonal cuff
links recovered from each wrist. Burial333 had
6bone buttons in the pelvic area. Burial 392 had
11buttons, some in fragments and others associated
with cloth; the positions of the buttons are indicative of breeches. This man also had an octagonal
cuff link face at the right clavicle (collar bone); the
apparent mate was recovered in the laboratory when
the cervical vertebrae were cleaned. The only other
item of adornment found with a Late-Middle Group
interment, the woman in Burial107, was a single
cylindrical red and green glass bead found during
cleaning of the cranium in the laboratory; the bead
may have been worn in her hair. Pins are discussed
further in Chapter11, buttons in Chapter12, and the
bead in Chapter13.
For convenience, we will look at spatial distribution
of the Late-Middle Group burials using the same
subareas we used for the Middle Group (the western,

Table 27. Late-Middle Group Burials
Burial
No.
Age
Category
Low
Age
High
Age
Sex
adult
30
40
male
86.5
4A
adult
20
25
male?
subadult
0.5
undetermined
subadult
10
adult
40
11
adult
30
13/43
subadult
42
infant
54
adult
60
subadult
61
undetermined
64
subadult
67
adult
40
50
89
adult
50
60
91
subadult
101
adult
26
105
adult
106
Preservation
Code
Coffin
11
n/a
86.5
11
n/a
90
86.5
unidentified
undetermined
105
80.5
15
hexagonal
45
male
88
82.5
20
hexagonal
40
male?
90
83.5
12
hexagonal
-7
four sided?

(degrees)
(feet)
(feet)
2.5
4.5
undetermined
90
undetermined
76
91.5
45
hexagonal
undetermined
90
92
-4
unidentified
0.75 undetermined
95
93.5
four sided?
undetermined
82
87.5
45
unidentified
0.88 undetermined
82
92.5
45
hexagonal
male
88
94
y
(no cranium)
unidentified
female
92
90.5
48
hexagonal
undetermined
84
95
48
hexagonal
35
male
78
88.5
49
hexagonal
35
45
male
89
95
60
hexagonal
adult
25
35
female?
92
90.5
71
hexagonal
107
adult
35
40
female
93
90
48
hexagonal
108
subadult
0.25
0.75 undetermined
68
87
53
hexagonal
109
subadult
0.67
1.33 undetermined
126
90.5
54
hexagonal
119
adult
93
88.5
72
hexagonal
123
subadult
96
89.5
80
hexagonal?
n/a
95
73.5
74
n
(empty coffin)
hexagonal
undetermined
102
73.5
74.5
hexagonal
male
90
95.5
68.5
n/a
male
103
74.5
65.5
hexagonal
undetermined
113
86.5
80
four-sided
104
78.5
57
rectangular
undetermined
87
71.5
122
unidentified
male?
95
76.5
118
y
(no cranium)
hexagonal
108
83.5
72
unidentified
0.25
0.38
0.67
35
0.67
1.3
45
1.33 undetermined
145
0
male
146
infant
168
adult
176
adult
198
subadult
216
infant
0.16 undetermined
219
subadult
222
adult
229
subadult
20
24
6.75 11.25 undetermined
105

Table 27. Late-Middle Group Burials (continued)
Preservation
Code
Coffin
123
hexagonal
78.5
62
hexagonal
101
79.5
79
hexagonal
undetermined
96
82.5
65.5
hexagonal
undetermined
105
82.5
94
hexagonal
undetermined
89
81
125
tapered
male
89
84
114
hexagonal
tapered
hexagonal
hexagonal
220
unidentified
88.5
249
unidentified
92
80.5
126
hexagonal
male
121
81.5
230.5
rectangular
female
92
84.5
133.5
hexagonal
male
100
67.5
131
hexagonal
male
109
72
228.5
no coffin
undetermined
119
69.5
235
y
(cranium only)
unidentified
60
female
100
70.5
132
hexagonal
45
65
male
98
77
134.5
hexagonal
32.6
57.8
female
103
75.5
235
no coffin
75.5
235
n
(not excavated)
n/a
68
140.5
no coffin
71.5
140
rectangular
107
76.5
135.5
hexagonal
95
62.5
175.5
hexagonal
Age
Category
235
adult
28
42
female
85
71.5
238
adult
40
50
male
102
251
subadult
12
14
undetermined
253
subadult
13
15
267
adult
289
subadult
290
adult
311
subadult
314
adult
40
50
male
97
82
316
adult
18
20
female
95
88.5
317
adult
19
39
male?
91.5
319
adult
female
332
adult
35
40
male?
333
adult
45
55
338
adult
33
65
352
adult
357
adult
362
adult
373
adult
45
376
adult
377
adult
381
undetermined
391
adult
16.5
19.5
male
392
adult
42.5
52.5
male
395
adult
43
53
male
413
adult
50
70
female
Low
Age
High
Age

(degrees)
(feet)
(feet)
Burial
No.
45
55
0.25
45
Sex
0.75 undetermined
65
100
88.5
undetermined
90
99.5
134
99.5
west-central, east-central/Lot18, and southeast subareas (see Figures87a87e).

Burial orientations, all head-to-west in the graves
assigned to the Late-Middle Group, were at angles
that overall were more similar to those in the Middle
Group than to those in the Late Group. Late-Middle
Group burials, like the rest of the Middle Group, often
appear to be sited with some sense of an appropriate

separation from other burials. Again, as in the Middle
Group, even childrens graves sometimes seem to have
been dug several feet apart from others, as though such
separation was part of a standard practice. Burials5, 7
(see Figure87b), 109, 123, and 198 (see Figure87c)
were all childrens graves that were spatially separated
Figure 87a. Excavated Late-Middle Group burials (prepared for the United States General Services Administration).
Figure 87c. Late-Middle Group burials, west-central area (prepared for the United States General Services Administration).
Figure 87d. Late-Middle Group burials, east-central and Lot 18 areas (prepared for the United States General Services Administration).
Figure 88. Age distribution, Late-Middle Group. White bars indicate individuals whose age could not be determined
(includes only burials from which remains were recovered).
Figure 89. Adult sex distribution, Late-Middle Group.

from other graves in the Late-Middle temporal group;
yet their deliberate placement above or near burials
we have placed with the earlier groups is possible, so
the apparent isolation may be false. By this time the
cemetery was becoming increasingly crowded, and
the filling in of spaces between earlier graves had
clearly commenced. Although Late-Middle Group
graves might be spatially separated from one another,
they most often overlay or lay close beside earlier
graves.
The Western Area

The western part of the site is shown in Figure87b.
Burials 54, 60, and 67, all adjacent, were placed
above earlier burials from both the Middle and
Early Groups, although there is no way to determine whether or not they were deliberately sited
with reference to the earlier graves (the cluster is
shown on Figure80). Burial60, which held a baby
of 39months, may have been deliberately placed at
the foot of Burial67, the grave of a man between 40
and 50, although the two had separate grave shafts,
indicating the child was interred later than the man.
Burial54 was about 1foot to the north of Burial67 and
held a second adult, although because it was truncated
from the legs up, no sex or age could be assigned. All
three form a possible group.
Burials4, 4A, 5, 7, and 11 also were placed above
earlier graves, possibly deliberately. As we mentioned in
Chapter6, the Early Group Burial18 had a headstone,
and therefore the deliberate placement of Burials7 and
11 above and adjacent to it should be considered likely
(although a social relationship cannot necessarily be
inferred). Burials7 and 11 also fill in between two
Middle Group graves (Burials74 on the north and 30
on the south), suggesting that the spacing of graves,
although tight, was deliberate. The entire cluster of
graves from Burial74 south to Burials4, 4A, and 5
appears as a roughly linear arrangement, the graves
nearly parallel. Burial6, too, offset somewhat to the
east, may have been added later. It is possible to envision
the deliberate reuse of this small area over time, with
Burial18 as the anchor marked by a headstone.
In the southwesternmost corner of the excavation
was the grave of a child between 2 and 4years of age,
Burial13/43 (excavated as two separate interments
and subsequently determined to represent a single
burial). This grave was outlined with a double arc
of cobbles, found in situ (see Figure 57 in Chapter 5). It seems likely the cobble grave marker was
tended until such time as this area was covered over

with fill. Based on general stratigraphy in the area and
the fact that its rather ephemeral surface marker was
intact, Burial13/43 has been placed in the Late-Middle
temporal group, although it could be placed in the
Middle cohort instead. This corner of the site gives us
a tantalizing glimpse of the type of surface markers
that once may have been used throughout the African
Burial Ground (see additional description of the area
in sections entitled Mortuary Material Culture in
Chapters6 and 7). As we noted in Chapter3, historical development as well as machine stripping during
the project resulted in the loss of the original surface
layer over the majority of the site.
The West-Central Area

Burialsin the Late Group in the west-central site area
are shown in Figure99c. We noted in Chapter7 that
Middle Group Burials96 and 94, an adult and child
in a shared grave, were surrounded and overlain by
later graves of several more children, Burials42,
64, 61, and 91. We cannot determine how close in
time all of the interments occurred but place the latter four in the Late-Middle Group because of their
stratigraphic relationship to the double burial. The
entire cluster exhibits a relatively uniform orientation, slightly northward of grid west, suggesting the
earliest grave may have been marked at the surface
and the later graves deliberately aligned with it. The
single adult, in Middle Group Burial96, appears to
have anchored the grouping.
There was a gap or void in Late-Middle Group
burials from approximately 5570feet grid east and
approximately 8095feet grid south. Within the void
was a smaller circular area without graves from any
period (see Figure 7, pocket map). The absence of
burials there is intriguing. The circular arrangement
of graves around a central void may allude to, or
reproduce, a cosmogram. But it also may allude to
former topography, such as a mound, that had been
destroyed through leveling, with soil from the top of
the mound scattered to become part of the overlying fill (for discussion of burials arranged around
mounds at Newton Plantation, see Handler and Lange
[1978:105117]).
On the west side of the void were Burials108, 101,
107, 89, and 109. Burials101 and 108 may represent
a deliberate pairing of an infant with a man, although
the excavation records do not clarify the relationship
between the two grave cuts. Burial101 had the coffin

with the heart-shaped design on its lid; this burial held
a man between 26 and 35years of age. Burials89 and
107 represent the possible shared grave of a woman in
her fifties placed above a woman in her late thirties.
The two hexagonal coffins were essentially parallel
and precisely aligned. They were just to the south of
Burial101, although oriented differently.
Northeast of the void, Burials176, 238, and 253
appear to be filling in between Middle Group burials
along a north-south row. The northernmost of these,
Burial176, appears to have been placed along the
south side of the fence that once marked the northern
boundary of the cemetery. Just to its east, Burials145
(containing an empty adult coffin) and 146 (of an
infant in a coffin) also seem to have been placed up
against the fence line, although not because of crowding, as there was space to the south. It is possible the
Middle and Late-Middle Group graves in the area were
deliberately placed so as not to disturb early graves,
Burials200 and 282.
Burial145 suggests one of three scenarios: a stolen
cadaver, removal of the remains for secondary burial,
or deliberate burial of an empty coffin for either religious purposes or for deception. The fact that the
Burial146 child coffin was placed atop the empty
coffin argues against the body-snatching scenario. As
we noted for the empty coffins of the Middle Group
(see the section entitled Unique and Unusual Burials in Chapter7), it is not possible to choose among
possible explanations.
East of the void, Burials119 and 106 were placed
adjacent to each other, only a foot apart and parallel,
as though a pair. An underlying Early Group grave,
Burial120, was partially displaced when Burial119
was interred, suggesting that the grave digger was
unaware of the previous burial, but bones from
Burial120 were set aside with some care rather than
simply mixed with the shaft fill. Three other underlying interments, Burials263, 272, and 218 were left
intact by Burial119.
The East-Central Area

Four pairs of graves are noted in the east-central area
(see Figure87d): Burials289 and 332, Burials219 and
235, Burials376 and 395, and Burials314 and 338.
Burial289, which held a child between 5 and 9years
old buried with a tiny quartz crystal, was placed so
as to overlap with Burial332, the grave of a man
whose initials, HW, and probable age, 38, were
tacked on his coffin lid (see the illustrations in this
chapter in the section entitled Unique and Unusual

Burials and in Chapter10). Burial219 held a young
child buried above a woman aged 2842, within the
latters grave shaft.
Burials376 and 395 were of men whose age ranges
extended from 45 and 43 to 60 and 53. The pair is
placed in the Late-Middle Group because they appear
to have been part of a north-south row of burials
that filled in between existing Middle Group graves
(see Figure7 [pocket map] for the distribution of
burials from all temporal groups in this area). This
row may have extended all the way to the north edge
of the site, but the interments north of the fence line
are assigned to the Late Group. Burials352 and 373
are part of this row. At the south end of the row are
Burials314 and 338, a pairing of a man between 40
and 50 and a woman aged 3365, whose coffins seem
to have been placed side by side and parallel, possibly
in a shared grave.
At the east edge of the east-central area, Burials391 and 392 are somewhat problematic in their
assignment. Both may in fact belong with Late Group
burials. In the case of Burial391, this is suggested by
its lack of a coffin, but again, we have not used this
variable alone to place interments in the last period.
Burial392 seems to have totally disturbed an underlying Middle Group burial (Burial390), and thus the
interments may have been separated by many years.
However, this area was never fully excavated, and
burial relationships are not clear-cut. It seems prudent
to place both burials in the Late-Middle Group, with
the caveat, rather than in the Late Group. Burial392 is
described in the section entitled Unique and Unusual
Burials.
The Southeast Area

Two burials in the southeast area of the excavated site
(see Figure87e) were assigned to the Late-Middle
period on the basis of artifacts recovered from the
grave-shaft fill (Burials333 and 357), and two additional, disturbed burials were placed in this group on the
basis of stratigraphic position (Burials317 and 319).
Burials333 and 357 were oriented identically to
numerous Middle Group burials in the immediate
vicinity. Two Early Group burials nearby were also
parallel (Burials387 and 388). The very strong alignment of all of these interments suggests the grave
diggers used some constant feature to orient the openings, and/or, of course, that they were all purposefully
aligned with each other. As noted in Chapter7, a

trench (Feature 163) with a similar orientation ran
just to the north of these graves, and the trench itself
may have provided the alignment, or it too may have
followed another feature.

Decorated Coffins
Coffin decorations that survived archaeologically were
very rare at the New York African Burial Ground, but
there were four (out of five overall) in the Late-Middle
Group. Photographs and drawings taken during excavation show the coffin lids of Burials101, 176, and
332, but Burial222, which had tacks that apparently
formed a decorative lid pattern, was disturbed by
vandals before the decoration was recorded.
Two of these burials held individuals that can confidently be identified as men (Burials101 and 176), and
the other two (Burials222 and 332) held individuals
that were very likely men as well. Calculated age
ranges were 2024 (Burial176), 2635 (Burial101),
and 3540 (Burial332). Burial222 could not be
assigned an age range. Burials222 and 332 were
located just 5feet apart, in the east-central part of the
site (see Figure87d). Burials101 and 176 were not
close by each other, but both were in the same general
area, in the west-central part of the site (see Figure87c).
It is noteworthy that the men in Burials101, 176, and
332 each had a child or infant buried either immediately adjacent to or above his grave.
The tack pattern on the lid of the Burial101 coffin
was first described as heart shaped, with unidentified
designs within the outline of the heart (Figure90). As
discussed in Chapter10, the interior decoration may
represent initials and a date of death. In this case, the
upper portion, which would be the initials, has not
been deciphered (the tacks displaced as the coffin
wood rotted); the lower portion may have formed
numerals for the year 1769 (Figure91).
The heartlike design has also been identified as a
Sankofa symbol associated with Twi-speaking Akan
people of Ghana and the Ivory Coast. The symbol
depicts a proverb, Se wo were fi na wo sankofa a
yenkyi which can be translated as It is not a taboo to
return and fetch it when you forget. It reminds people
of the need to [tie] the past with the present in order
to prepare for the future (Ofori-Ansa 1995:3).
Four straight pins, three on the cranium (one with
a small tuft of hair) and one on the torso, were found
Figure 90. In situ photograph of coffin lid decoration

formed of iron tacks in Burial 101 (photograph by
Dennis Seckler).
Figure 91. Possible reading of the year 1769 formed

by tacks on the lid of Burial 101.
with the bones, but no other artifacts were recovered.

Excavators recorded two possible bone button fragments on the left leg; however, no buttons were cataloged in the laboratory, and it is possible the observed
pieces were simply fragments of the skeleton.
One of the mans incisors had been intentionally
filed, a practice found in Africa and a possible indicator of his birth on that continent. Chemical analysis
was undertaken in an attempt to determine whether
the man had spent the early part of his life in Africa,
Figure 92. In situ drawing of Burial 101 skeletal remains. Scale is 1 inch
= 2 feet (drawing by MSchur).
but strontium isotope levels overlapped those of individuals from the cemetery population that are likely
to have been born in New York (young children),
although lead levels were low, close to those in other
individuals with modified teeth. The mans nativity
remains ambiguous.
Preservation of the skeleton was excellent (Figure 92) and several pathologies were observed,
including signs of periostitis (bone scarring due to
inflammation from bacterial infection or injury) on
the cranium and legs; saber shin (suggesting he had
treponemal disease); stress-affected muscle attachments at the elbows; conditions of the bones at the
joints that indicated mild to severe arthritis; enamel
hypoplasias on the teeth suggesting childhood nutritional stress; and severe molar caries with indications
of likely abscesses and perhaps infections of the surrounding bone.
The coffin in Burial176 was the only one excavated
that had a full set of coffin handles, two on each side
and one at each end (see Chapter10 for illustrations
and discussion). Its lid was decorated with iron tacks
around the entire perimeter, spaced 2 inches apart
also unique within the excavated sample (Figures93
and 94).
Figure 93. In situ photograph of excavation showing iron

tacks edging the lid of the Burial 176 coffin. Six handles
were also found. Ruler is marked in feet; north is to the
right (photograph by Dennis Seckler).
Figure 94. In situ photograph of one of the Burial 176 coffin handles
during excavation. Ruler is marked in inches (photograph by Dennis
Seckler).
The lid tacks and handles were recorded in situ

during excavation. The only other artifact found in
association with the remains was a straight pin fragment from the jaw/neck area. It is possible Burial312,
of an infant, was placed immediately adjacent to the
Figure 95. Left, in situ photograph of Burial 332 coffin lid decoration formed of iron tacks (photograph by Dennis Seckler); right,
reconstruction of initials HW and number 38. The coffin lid had split longitudinally, severing the H and the likely 3.
Burial176 grave, although the stratigraphic relationship is not clear.

Only one of the graves excavated at the New York
African Burial Ground held a clue to the name of
the deceased. This was Burial332, where the coffin
lid had been decorated with iron tacks forming the
initials HW (M is an alternative, but perhaps less
likely reading of the first letter) and a number, probably 38 (Figure95). The number was probably the
mans age, which agrees closely with the age range
calculated from skeletal analysis (3540). Thus far,
documentary sources have not yielded any record of
a man with initials H.W. who is likely to have been
laid to rest at the New York African Burial Ground,
but future compilations of the names of African New
Yorkers or escapees from out of town may yet reveal
a plausible identity.
There were just two items recovered from this
burial other than the coffin and the skeletal remains
(Figure96). One straight pin and a lock of hair were
recorded under the right side of the cranium, and
during cleaning of the thoracic vertebrae in the laboratory, a curved copper-alloy object was recovered,
adhering to a fragment of coffin wood. The latter
may have been the remnant of an earring or a curved
pin (see Chapter13). As noted, a child of 59years
old (Burial289) may have been deliberately buried
immediately above HW.
Burial 392
Burial392 was one of just four interments in the excavated sample that was oriented with the head toward
Figure 96. In situ photograph

of H W (Burial 332) skeletal
remains after removal of the
coffin lid. Ruler is marked
in feet; north is to the right
the east (Figure97). It also contained a rectangular

coffin, one of only two adult coffins that were clearly
of this shape. One explanation for the east-headed
orientation is that the symmetrical coffin was lowered
into the grave without the bearers knowing which end
was the head, although deliberate placement is also
possible. The coffin was of unique construction among
those recorded at this site, with at least two cross
pieces nailed to the lengthwise boards of the lid.

The man in Burial392 was buried wearing breeches,
as evidenced by buttons found at the knees and hips
(see Chapter12). In addition, two octagonal cuff links
were found in the neck/shoulder area. The skeletal
remains were in poor condition, complete but crushed
and very eroded. Three possible urinary stones were
removed from below the hip, and possible healed
fractures of the left kneecap and right ribs were also
noted.
Figure 97. In situ photograph of Burial 392. Ruler

alongside the remains is marked in feet; north is to the
right (photograph by Stan Bottitta).
Chapter 9
The Late Group

Late Group assignments are based on the dating of artifacts from grave shafts, on stratigraphic relationships,
and, most importantly, on burial location, as discussed
in Chapter4. Reasons to place this group in the period
from 1776 to the close of the cemetery include the
destruction of the fence marking the cemeterys north
edge and likely usurpation of Rutgers property during
the British occupation, and northward pressure caused
by military uses of the ground to the south (for a more
complete discussion, see Chapter4). The frequency of
coffinless burials and the preponderance of men to the
north of the fence-post alignment is also best explained
by the circumstances of the Revolutionary War and the
British occupation of New York, as discussed in the
section on mortuary material culture.
The town and its population are characterized, and
then the mortuary sample and related material culture
are described. A discussion of the spatial distribution of
excavated graves and descriptions of some unique and
unusual burials in this temporal group follow.
The Town
The American War for Independence profoundly
disrupted the citys streets, homes, and cemeteries.
British troops took the city in the first months of the
war and occupied it for 7years. Conflagrations, beginning with the Great Fire of September 1776, ravaged
the downtown area, destroying huge swaths of the
built environment. Public spaces were taken over for
military use. Soldiers were billeted in barracks on the
Common and in private homes appropriated for army
use, including Isaac Tellers on the western side of
the African Burial Ground. Thousands of prisoners
of war languished in makeshift prisons and on prison
ships, most of them perishing before hostilities ended.
Loyalists from the hinterland relocated to the city, and
over the course of the war refugees streamed into town

(on New York in general during and after the war, see
Burrows and Wallace [1999:223287]; on the presence and role of Africans in the city in these years, see
Historical Perspectives of the African Burial Ground
[Medford and Brown 2009a:98102; Medford and
Brown 2009b:103104], Hodges [1999:139161],
and Foote [2004:212216]).
Africans from New York and New Jersey escaped
from households sympathetic to the patriot cause and
joined the British forces in the months leading up to
the war. They were responding to Lord Dunmores
proclamation freeing enslaved and indentured servants
who supported the crown. During the occupation of
New York City, thousands of blacks from surrounding areas and from distant colonies found their way
to refuge here. Those confiscated by the British from
patriot households during the war were brought to
the city, and Loyalist refugees brought their own
enslaved Africans with them. The British used hundreds of African workers, mainly runaways, during
the occupation, paying wages (or, sometimes, rum) for
various types of labor. Housing was in seriously short
supply, but some were billeted in Negro Barracks
(appropriated buildings), several in the vicinity of
upper Broadway (New York Public Library, Special
Collections, British Headquarters Papers 17751783,
List of Barrack Houses in the Garrison of New York,
No.10349). A Black Brigade had been organized
when the British took the town, and blacks brought
in from other colonies joined its ranks. The Black
Pioneers were commissioned in 1776 to serve as
guards, pilots, spies, and interpreters to the Native
Americans (Hodges 1999:147). Blacks were used
mainly as teamsters but also for cleaning the streets
and in the fuel and ordnance departments; they rebuilt
the infrastructure burned in the Great Fire, were used
for foraging expeditions, and worked as pilots on

harbor craft. Numerous opportunities for paid work
were seized by Africans during this time, but harsh
exploitation of the enslaved also characterized the
occupation. Severe wartime shortages, especially of
food, fuel, and lumber for building, made life in the
city difficult for all.
By an agreement negotiated with Washington,
when the British evacuated New York in 1783, the
blacks who officially left with them were inspected
and registered. This was the famous Book of Negroes
(New York Public Library, Special Collections, British
Headquarters Papers 17751783, No. 10427, 1783),
listing some 3,000men, women, and children, many
of whom testified that they had escaped from households in New York or other colonies and come to New
York, or had served in the British forces during the war.
Approximately 80percent of the black refugees listed
were from southern colonies and 20percent from New
York and New Jersey (Foote 1991:342343). It is
estimated that perhaps a thousand additional blacks
evacuated with the British in private vessels (Quarles
1961:172), for a total of approximately 4,000.
It is likely that most blacks who died during the
occupation, whatever their residence or status, were
buried in the African Burial Ground, though Trinitys
small Negroes cemetery on Church Street was probably available to church members, of whom there were
many among Anglican loyalist families. Reportedly,
many black refugees also joined the church (Hodges
1999:146147).
Dissenting Christian denominations also were attracting black members. The John Street Methodist Church
reported membership of 25blacks in 1786, 70 in 1789,
135 in 1791, and 155 by 1795 (Walls 1974:4046).
After the war, black churchgoers increasingly moved to
separate from white congregations, where restrictions
on their full participation as members and preachers
continued unabated. A pivotal moment in the history of
the black church in America was the formation in New
York of a separate black Methodist meeting in 1795.1
One of the galvanizing issues behind the separatist
movement in this and other churches was probably the
In the 1780s, the John Street congregation had several Negro
Classes with men and women separated, as was the church practice.
Several of the men who would emerge as leaders of the black
community and founders of a separate black congregation were in
Class Number31; Class Number28 included Peter Williams,Sr., the
churchs sexton and one of its grave diggers, who worked at John
Street to earn his own freedom. Black Methodists met in a house on
Cross Street in 1795. In 1801, they incorporated the African Methodist
Episcopal Zion Church and erected their own chapel, with a burial
ground as well as a vault, on Church Street (see Walls 1974).
1
demise of the African Burial Ground, which, we believe,

had heretofore served as a focal religious institution in
New Yorks African community.
A new soldiers barracks erected at present-day
Chambers Street and the use of the ground behind the
barracks for a cemetery by the British (see Figure21
in Chapter 2) would have constricted the African
cemetery and possibly pushed it northward. Members
of the citys African community might have appropriated the southern edge of the Rutgers Farm (the
old Calk Hook Farm) for burials at this time. As discussed in Chapter4, the British reportedly destroyed
the fence that had marked the boundary between the
burial ground and the Rutgers/Barclay property; that
property may have been left unleased, or been held
in uncertain possession, during the war. The houses
within the Van Borsum patent were either destroyed
or were occupied by various tenants, also in uncertain
possession, during the war once Teller was removed
(Johnson 18531859:9:17477).
The growth of the town in the decade following the
war is reflected in the 1797 Taylor-Roberts Plan (see
Figure26 in Chapter 2). Streets and building lots were
laid out northward from Chambers Street, and in 1787,
the Barclays began selling off lots along Duane Street,
on the northern edge of the African Burial Ground.
Sometime soon after, a new fence was probably constructed, once again delimiting the area Africans could
use. Within 7years, claimants to the Van Borsum patent
were able to have the remainder of the cemetery land
surveyed and sold in lots (see Chapter2).
Depredations on the African Burial Ground from
medical students seeking cadavers in the 1780s led to
forceful protests from the citys African community
leaders. Aside from providing a window on the development of black leadership in the town, the protests
revealed the vulnerability of what we believe was still
the communitys most important institution at the time,
their cemetery. As explained in Chapter2, at least
one attempt was made to provide a more secure place
of burial (Mr.Scipio Grays plot on Gold Street), but
that, too, was subject to depredation. Africans were
particular targets of this practice, as attested by numerous newspaper accounts, and were the first to raise a
public protest. Public anger against doctors was first
aroused when a free African American mans letter
was printed in the Daily Advertiser on February16,
1788.2 The author suggested that a law be passed
The writers name was omitted for reasons, as the publisher stated,
which must be obvious to the author.
2
Chapter 9 . The Late Group 193

Year
Label in Census
1771
blacks
1779
blacks
1786
slaves
Adults
Male
932 a
896
Children
Female
Male
Female
1,085
568
552
1,207
1790 all other free persons and slaves

(no separate count
given by gender)
Age for Children
Free
Enslaved
<16
Total
3,137
No separate
count given by
gender or age.
1,951
No separate
count of
children.
2,103
No separate
count given by
gender or age.
1,036 b
2,056
3,092
Note: Information from the U.S. Bureau of the Census (1909) and White (1991:126); for 1779, Elliott Papers cited in
Hodges (1999:150).
a
Includes 42 men over the age of 60.
b
Includes 678 men living in free black households and 349 living in households headed by whites. In 1790, about half of
the enslaved (1,170 persons) and about half of the free blacks living in households headed by whites lived with merchants,
artisans, or retail tradesmen (White 1991:7).
prohibiting dissection of any but criminals so that a

stop might be put to this horrid practice here; and the
mind of a very great number of my fellow-liberated,
or still enslaved Blacks quieted. The closing of the
letter is an intimation of rising concern on the part
of the aggrieved African community. His next letter
contained a less veiled threat: students of physick
were warned that their lives may be the forfeit of
their temerity should they dare to persist in their
robberies (Daily Advertiser, February 28, 1788). A
group of free and enslaved black men also petitioned
the Common Council to protect the graves of blacks
(Municipal Archives of the City of New York, Papers
of the Common Council, Petitions, Free Negroes and
Slaves of the City of New York, February14, 1787).
Black leaders thus pursued simultaneous strategies:
appealing to the authorities and threatening to meet
violence against the dead with violence on the streets.
A general riot that became known as the Doctors
Riot erupted in April, showing that New Yorkers of
European heritage were as incensed about grave robbing as were Africans, and suggests that for people
of all backgrounds the desecration of the dead was a
particularly heinous crime.
The Population
Census
African New Yorkers made up 14.3percent of the
population before the war but were only 9.9percent
of the city total in 1790. This drop does not reflect a
decrease in the black population, which was essentially the same in 1771 and 1790. Rather, European
immigration accelerated following the war, their numbers increasing by 10,000.
Census figures for Africans are available for points
in time bracketing the war years (1771 and 1786)
and for 1790, which can be considered the eve of the
African Burial Grounds closing (Table28). There
was also one count taken during the occupation, in
1779 (Hodges 1999:150). Fluctuations during the war
years went unrecorded, however. We do know that
3,0004,000blacks left with the British in 1783 and
that most of them were from out of town. The 1779
count seems low; it may be inaccurate, or it is possible the numbers of fugitive/refugee Africans swelled
after that year.
Figure 98. Locations of households in New York

in 1790: top, free black households; bottom,
slaveholding households. Arrows point to the
location of the African Burial Ground. (From
Somewhat More Independent: The End of Slavery
in New York City, 17701810, by Shane White.
1991 by the University of Georgia Press,
Athens, Georgia 30602. All rights reserved.)
In addition to the census figures, data on residential

patterns of both enslaved and free blacks in New York
are available. Shane White, by analyzing the census
and city directories, has been able to locate most of
the households inhabited by people of African descent
(Figure98). The extent of slaveholding in the early
federal era is evident.
The numbers of free blacks in New York are difficult to reconstruct for the period before 1790. Because
the number of enslaved persons in the 1786 census
is roughly equal to the number enslaved in 1790, it
is possible that the free blacks were counted with the
white population in 1786. Many came to New York
during the war as fugitives and stayed on. Others constituted the small number of free blacks whose families had been living in the city for many years, even
generations. Free blacks were overwhelmingly conThe New York African Burial Ground
centrated in the Montgomerie Ward, especially along

Fair, Gold, and Beekman Streets near St. Georges
Chapel, where Scipio Gray worked, and adjacent to
which the African Free School was founded in 1789
(see Rothschild 1990:100101).
There was a preponderance of black women over
men in counts taken both before and after the war.
Child-to-woman ratios cannot be calculated except
for 1771, when about one child per adult female was
counted.
Mortuary Sample
Late Group burials, numbering 114, are listed in
Table29. In the table, head angle is the orientation in
degrees west of north (discussed in Chapter5). Preservation codes are explained in Chapter3. N/a in the

Table 29. Late Group Burials
Burial
No.
Age
Category
Low
Age
High
Age
adult
20
25
female?
adult
27
42
male
adult
25
30
male?
12
adult
35
45
14
infant
15
subadult
11
45
20
28
adult
Sex

(degrees)
(feet)
(feet)
Coffin
82.5
hexagonal
43.5
11
n/a
91
87.5
15
hexagonal
female
83
89.5
12
rectangular?
undetermined
89
89.5
12
rectangular
18
undetermined
105
103.5
-5
unidentified
50
male
85
no coffin
undetermined
83
-2
unidentified
87.5
-5
unidentified
0.5
subadult
94
Preservation
Code
36
adult
37
adult
45
55
male
102
65
20
hexagonal
40
adult
50
60
female
94
65
10
hexagonal
51
adult
24
32
female
118
75
10
hexagonal
58
subadult
59
female
3.5
4.5
undetermined
93
65
15
rectangular
infant
0.25 undetermined
90
65
15
hexagonal
63
adult
35
91
70
15
hexagonal
65
infant
90
75
10
hexagonal?
71
adult
25
35
female
102
75
10
hexagonal
76
adult
25
55
male
112
75
10
no coffin
45
male
0.49 undetermined
86
subadult
undetermined
91
74
18
hexagonal
95
subadult
12
undetermined
76
94.5
51
hexagonal
40
50
male
97
81
20
hexagonal
78
91.5
70
unidentified
91.5
77
n/a
n/a
97
adult
99
subadult
10
undetermined
117
infant
undetermined
125
adult
131
subadult
female?
89
64.5
52
unidentified
undetermined
90
91.5
76.5
unidentified
132
adult
25
30
male
98
64.5
61.5
hexagonal
134
adult
40
50
female
106
62.5
85
hexagonal
135
adult
30
40
male
100
70
70
hexagonal
137
adult
25
35
undetermined
100
63
75
unidentified
undetermined
98
67.5
86
rectangular
138
subadult
147
adult
55
65
male
81
70.5
56.5
hexagonal
150
adult
20
28
female
117
70.5
80
no coffin
151
adult
35
45
male
138
67.5
83
hexagonal
undetermined
110
55.5
67
unidentified
female?
111
54.5
74
hexagonal
152
153
undetermined
adult

Table 29. Late Group Burials (continued)
Burial
No.
Age
Category
157
adult
158
adult
20
30
male
162
adult
35
45
13
164
165
subadult
Low
Age
High
Age
Sex

(degrees)
(feet)
(feet)
female?
Preservation
Code
Coffin
53.5
81.5
n/a
111
63
92
no coffin
male
109
55
51.5
unidentified
undetermined
97
52.5
91
tapered
undetermined
108
62.5
73
no coffin
undetermined
111
55.5
92.5
rectangular
96
65
y
(no cranium)
unidentified
adult
166
subadult
0.5
170
subadult
11
undetermined
90
171
adult
44
60
male
114
53.5
99.5
hexagonal
172
adult
25
35
female
118
40.5
88
no coffin
121
57
101
rectangular
115
60.5
90
hexagonal
62
57
n/a
173
subadult
174
adult
178
adult
179
adult
180
181
subadult
adult
0.25
17
0.75 undetermined
18
male
male
25
30
male
110
46.5
98
hexagonal
11
13
undetermined
111
50
97.5
hexagonal
20
23
male
86
66
115
no coffin
50
113.5
hexagonal
52
108.5
four sided
54.5
122
no coffin
183
subadult
0.63
1.13 undetermined
184
subadult
1.5
121
185
adult
21
186
infant
0.17 undetermined
124
47.5
110
hexagonal
187
subadult
1.5
undetermined
112
52.5
119.5
hexagonal
32
undetermined
95
58.5
52.5
n/a
0.88 undetermined
112
55
100.5
hexagonal
87.5
no coffin
188
190
adult
subadult
26
23
undetermined
0.38
male
191
adult
25
30
male
109
56.5
192
adult
40
60
female
116
67
101.5
hexagonal
193
adult
30
48
male
109
65.5
101.5
no coffin
194
adult
30
40
male
104
50.5
84
hexagonal
195
adult
30
40
female
100
81.5
63
hexagonal
196
adult
20
24
undetermined
90
83
56
hexagonal
197
adult
45
55
female
77
76
57.5
hexagonal
199
adult
30
40
female
112
73.5
80
no coffin
undetermined
101
59.5
70.5
rectangular
undetermined
83
59
77
hexagonal
77.5
98
n/a
59.5
102
hexagonal
201
subadult
203
adult
204
adult
205
adult
1.5
12
3.5
18
female?
18
20
female
108

Burial
No.
Age
Category
207
adult
208
subadult
Low
Age
High
Age
25
35
female?
undetermined
0.5
Sex

(degrees)
(feet)
(feet)
93
Preservation
Code
Coffin
78.5
95
tapered
77
96
unidentified
209
adult
40
50
male
117
42
94
hexagonal
210
adult
35
45
male
88
46
116
no coffin
211
adult
male?
95
77
79.5
no coffin
214
adult
45
55
male
99
79.5
63.5
hexagonal
217
adult
17
19
male
100
64.5
122.5
hexagonal
223
adult
25
35
female
101
66.5
76.5
no coffin
112
64.5
95.5
four sided
86
55
hexagonal
106
hexagonal
hexagonal
225
subadult
228
adult
230
adult
236
subadult
0.5
1.25 undetermined
55
65
male?
85
female
120
45.5
undetermined
90
84.5
53.5
241
adult
55
65
female
94
54.5
121
hexagonal
242
adult
40
50
female
90
49.5
117
hexagonal
243
adult
40
50
male
105
57.5
121
no coffin
244
subadult
undetermined
104
51.5
90
unidentified
252
subadult
undetermined
115
64.5
95.5
hexagonal
64.5
other
257
adult
30
40
male
100
72.1
259
adult
17
19
female?
105
40.5
102
hexagonal
262
adult
15
17
male?
94
38.5
120
no coffin
266
adult
25
35
female
105
38.5
113.5
hexagonal
276
adult
20
24
female
108
35.5
118.5
no coffin
278
adult
45
55
male
116
42
103
no coffin
297
adult
30
40
male
106
62.5
117.5
unidentified
299
adult
40
50
male
80
68.5
123.5
hexagonal
305
infant
57
122
hexagonal
309
adult
20
25
male
62
143.5
no coffin
313
adult
45
55
male
102
31.5
114.5
hexagonal
322
adult
female
99
64.5
140
n/a
323
adult
19
30
male
45
128.5
no coffin
325
adult
25
35
male
99
63.5
137.5
hexagonal
327
adult
35
45
male
98
48.5
129
no coffin
329
adult
male
85
56
128.5
no coffin
329.1
adult
undetermined
56
128.5
n/a
-0.33
0.33 undetermined
109

Burial
No.
Age
Category
Low
Age
High
Age
Sex
330
adult
28
58
male
331
adult
30
35
undetermined
337
adult
40
50
male
342
adult
25
35
343
adult
19
346
adult
354
adult
363
subadult

(degrees)
(feet)
(feet)
Preservation
Code
Coffin
58.5
140
n/a
58
137
n/a
116
37
130
no coffin
female?
104
50
129
hexagonal
23
male
92
59.5
130
hexagonal
50
70
female
117
57.5
138.5
hexagonal
35
45
male
93
44.5
129.5
hexagonal
undetermined
124
49.5
135
hexagonal
364
adult
25
35
male
90
44.5
143.5
no coffin
369
adult
40
50
male
83
54
131
no coffin
386
infant
101
48
121.5
unidentified
0.3 undetermined
coffin column indicates that the bones were severely

disturbed or redeposited so that coffin presence/
absence was not determined. The distribution of Late
Group graves is shown on Figures99a99d. Profiles
by age and sex are graphed in Figures100 and 101.
It is possible men predominate in this temporal group
because they were more likely than women to remain
in, or flee to, the occupied town, and because they were
volunteers or conscripts in the British army.

Coffins and Burialswithout Coffins
Most graves without coffins, most of which were
located to the north of the fence alignment, have been
assigned to this last period of the cemeterys use. In
Chapter5, we suggested three possible explanations
for burial without a coffin: (1) the inability of the
family and friends of the deceased to afford a coffin
or the refusal of an enslaved persons household head
to provide it, (2)burial under some kind of special
circumstance, or (3)adherence to a distinctive funeral
practice.
A culturally distinctive funeral program may be
the explanation for burial without coffins, but there
is no evidence, either documentary or archaeologiThe New York African Burial Ground
cal, to illuminate this possibility. Although coffins

were not used in most African cultures of our period,
there are no other features of the New York burials
that point to specific cultural origins. For example,
although we know that there were probably Muslims
among New Yorks African populationand in strict
adherence to Islamic law, they would not have used
coffins by choicebody orientation and the presence
of personal items argue against Muslim practice. The
other explanation based on distinctive funeral practice
is that these were poor church members who were
brought to the cemetery in a parish coffin, used to
transport the deceased but retained by the church for
repeated use. The growth in the late period of black
Christian congregations, especially at the Anglican
and Methodist churches, may support this explanation. Proper burial facilities were given priority by
eighteenth-century African American benefit societies
and by early leaders of the black churches, including
those in New York, but whether a church coffin would
have been seen as adequate is not known.
There is one obvious circumstance affecting the
provision of coffins. The disruptions of the war caused
shortages in supplies, particularly wood for fuel and
building. Even obtaining sufficient scrap lumber to
fashion a coffin for ones own kin might have been difficult. This explanation supports the dating of coffinless burials to the period of the occupation.
Figure 99a. Excavated Late Group burials (prepared for the United States General Services Administration).
Figure 99c. Late Group burials, west-central area (prepared for the United States General Services Administration).
Figure 99d. Late Group burials, east-central and Lot 18 areas (prepared for the United States General Services Administration).
Figure 100. Age distribution, Late Group. White bars include individuals whose age could not be determined (includes
only burials from which remains were recovered).
Figure 101. Adult sex distribution, Late Group.

Table 30. Late Group Burials without Coffins, by Sex and Age
Adult,
Undetermined
Age Group
1519
2024
2529
3034
3539
4044
4549
5054
Total
Female
Male
19
Undetermined
Note: Two coffinless burials of men (Burials 391 and 357) are in the Late-Middle Group (see Chapter 8), and these may
also be from the period of British occupation.
We hypothesize that another special circumstance

leading to coffinless burial was not a lack of means,
but a lack of people to see to these individuals funeral
arrangements. If the burials took place during the Revolution, the deceased may not have had time sufficient
to form deep social bonds in the local community.
They may have been soldiers, laborers in the employ
of the British forces, or refugees, and they may have
been in the city for only a short while. Typically, when
someone in the New York African community died,
the provision of a coffin was considered a minimum
standard of proper treatment. Even outsiders, in earlier
periods, may have been afforded this minimum through
the pooled resources of an established community
(which took in escapees or transient free blacks), or,
if enslaved, through their slaveholders, who were
obliged by custom to provide it. But during the war,
with severe disruptions in community life and the huge
influx of outsiders, we can imagine strangers dying
with no people of their own and no local group able
to take care of their funeral.
The fact that the coffinless burials are all of adults
lends support to the idea that these burials held transients. Children were unlikely to be in the city alone,
and therefore when a child died, there was probably
someone to see to its burial.3 The predominance of
men in coffinless burials also supports the interpretation: black soldiers and refugees who became laborers
Poor preservation of child burials may also account for the lack of
recorded coffinless childrens graves. Even with no dental preservation,
the outlines of graves should have been discernable. Yet, if excavation
failed to turn up any evidence of either a coffin or skeletal remains,
it is possible no burial would have been recorded, and disturbances
to the site may have obscured such graves beyond recognition. A
number of infants or small childrens coffins contained minimal or
no skeletal material; if a coffin aided preservation at least to some
degree, we would expect even less skeletal survival for coffinless
juveniles. The degree of skeletal preservation for individuals 15years
and older does not appear to have been significantly affected by the
presence of coffins.
3
for the British would have been buried at the African

Burial Ground (Table30).
This is not to deny the formation of families among
Revolutionary War refugees in New York, for there
is, in fact, evidence of this process. For example,
the lists of blacks evacuated with the British in 1783
provide information on several marriages of men and
women from distant places who met in the occupied
city (Foote 1991:370375; Kruger 1985:666673).
But many deaths must have occurred among those
who had not yet had opportunities to find kin, acquire
spouses, make friends, join a religious group, or otherwise form bonds within a local community.
The lumber shortage during the war cautions us
against overinterpreting the structural niche of occupants of coffinless burials. Even if families and friends
were on hand and wished to provide adequate funerals,
the means may not have been available. Still, we believe
that the provision of a coffin for most of the deceased
speaks to the efforts of mourners to provide that item
even in the face of shortages. Burials without coffins
may therefore represent individuals for whom less effort
was made, because they were strangers or because the
familys or households means were too limited.
Despite the possible hindrances, there were three
times as many Late Group burials with coffins than
without (79coffins). Hexagonal coffins are typical of
the late period. Only three of the adult coffins with recognizable shapes were not six sided: a tapered coffin
(Burial207), a possible rectangular coffin (Burial12),
and a possible eight-sided coffin with a two-piece
headboard (Burial257). Even among the children and
infants, 12 out of 21 recognizable coffin shapes were
hexagonal. One adult, in Burial207, had a four-sided
tapering coffin, the shape we have considered to be
typical of the early period. Although the presence of
a sherd of pearlware in the soil within the cranium and
the fact that the burial overlay many childrens graves
force us to consider it late, it is possible Burial207 has

been assigned incorrectly. Burial12, which also had
pearlware in the grave-shaft-fill soil, had a coffin for
which it is difficult to determine the shape, although
it appears to have been four sided.
Other Artifacts
Other types of material culture directly associated with
Late Group burials included pins, jewelry, plain and
decorative buttons and cuff links, and miscellaneous
items including coins. Fifty-threepercent (60 out of
114) of the Late Group burials had at least one pin.
Shrouding was probably typical, although 16individuals had some evidence of clothing (buttons, cuff
links at the wrists, or an aglet). Little in the way of
personal adornment was recovered from Late Group
burials, as was the case for the excavated cemetery
as a whole. A woman was laid to rest wearing a ring
with glass insets (Burial242), an infant was buried
with a glass and wire filigree ornament (Burial186),
and a young child was interred with a string of black
beads looped at the waist (Burial187).
Sixteen of the 33burials with clothing items that
were clearly associated with the deceased were in the
Late Group; more than half of the buttons recovered at
the New York African Burial Ground were from Late
Group burials. Particular types of clothing are suggested
in Burials6 (a jacket), 181 (trousers or breeches), 203
(breeches), and 259 (breeches). One man had cuff links
at each wrist (Burial158), and another was buried with
an enameled cuff-link face (Burial211); a possible cuff
link was recorded for Burial181.4
The greater frequency of buttons and cuff links in
later burials raises questions about the increased use
of street clothes as burial attire (see Chapter12). There
is a caveat, however: because buttons have in some
cases provided the rationale for placing burials in the
Late Group (Burial6, for example), a comparison of
button/no button burials within and across temporal
groups is suspect. In other words, there are probably
burials that date to the late period but that have not
been identified as late because they have no artifacts
and are not assignable spatially or stratigraphically.
Such burials would increase the frequency of buttonless burials in the Late Group.
Buttons, cuff links, and clothing are described in Chapter12. All
of the decorative buttons and all of the cuff links are considered as
personal adornment and hence are also discussed in Chapter13. The
enamel cuff-link face from Burial211 is illustrated in Chapter13.
Beads, rings, and pieces of jewelry made from metal and glass are
discussed in Chapter13, as well.
4
Miscellaneous items such as coins, shells, and

pipes were also more prominent in Late Group burials
than in burials from earlier groups (see Chapter14).
Because these items were not used to date burials,
the comparative frequency is more likely to reflect
actual mortuary practice than in the case of clothing
fasteners. Miscellaneous items were found in direct
association with 11individuals in the Late Group.
Two women (Burials230 and 242) and one man
(Burial135) had coins on their eyes. A coin and a
knife were found with another man (Burial214). Iron
tacks were found with a woman (Burial197) and a
young child (Burial138); the infant in Burial186 had
a possible nail on the left side of its cranium. The man
in Burial147 was found with a cluster of small copper rings and pins next to his right arm. Two adults
(Burials158 and 165) had portions of pipes.
Orientation
In the later grouping of burials, more graves were
angled southward relative to the site grid than in the
earlier or middle groupings (see discussion of orientation in Chapter5). The pattern may be evidence for
a higher frequency of winter deaths, or reliance on
physical features in the northern part of the cemetery
(for example, terracing along the slope of the hill),
or a more regularized approach to grave digging,
such that once a grave was dug, other graves were
aligned to it.
The fence-post alignment was oriented at approximately 102 west of grid north. If the southerly trend
of Late Group burials were construed as evidence of
alignment with the fence, the hypothesis that these
burials postdate the fences destruction must be
rejected. There remains the possibility that a path or
road extended roughly parallel to the property line,
leading from Broadway to the pottery buildings that
stood near the northeast part of the cemetery. The
trenches identified in Lot12 (see Chapter4) might
be related to such an access road. Such an east-west
feature could have been used to orient burials.
Rows
To a greater degree than elsewhere at the site, burials in the northern area appear to form rows with
north-south alignments. These rowlike alignments

can be explained in several, mutually compatible
ways. First, the alignments might reflect the lay of
the land, lying more or less along parallel terraces
on the sloping ground. This may be supported by the
somewhat more regular orientation of graves. Second,
the rowlike alignments might indicate that the dayto-day management of the cemetery was becoming
more regularized, so that a grave digger, rather than
the mourners themselves, would have sited graves.
Regularization of grave sites is also compatible with
our idea that the northern area was used during the
British occupation and contains many individuals
from outside the local community. The grouping
of graves with regard to known social ties, such as
kinship or residence, would not always have been
possible under the circumstances of war. Finally, the
arrangement may reflect a pragmatic response to a
heightened mortality rate. The war and the appalling
health conditions in the town would have raised the
death toll and possibly required several burials on a
single day. Similarly, the yellow fever that plagued
the city annually beginning in 1791 may have taken
lives at a rate requiring that several graves be prepared
at once.
Paired Burials
A woman-infant co-interment, Burials12 and 14,
was found in a relatively separate location in the
southwest part of the site (see Figure99b), and child
Burials225 (of a 612-month-old) and 252 (of an
18-month-old) form another pair in the northern area
of the site (see Figure99c, at the east edge of former
Lot15). Although there is no way to know, the pairs
may have been victims of the yellow fever epidemics
of the 1790s.
Burials137 and 165 in the northern area of the excavated site (see Figure99c, straddling the line between
former Lots14 and 15) may have been placed together
deliberately, since the two are spatially separate from
other interments within an apparent row. Burial137
was between 25 and 35years old and of undetermined
sex; Burial165 was an adult for whom neither sex nor
precise age could be determined. Burial137, which had
a coffin, overlay Burial165, which did not; the later
burial did not disturb the earlier, however.
Burials243 and 305 are the only other likely paired
burials in the Late Group (see Figure 99d, on the
line between former Lots16 and 17). They were
very unusual if in fact they were deliberately buried
together: the infant (in Burial305) was beneath the
adult (Burial243), a man between 40 and 50years

of age.
Gendered Space
We have noted that the predominance of men in the
later burials and their greater frequency in coffinless
burials is to be expected because of the presence of
soldiers and laborers during the British occupation.
Do the coffinless burials exhibit any spatial patterning by gender? There were three womens graves
(Burials223, 150, and 199) aligned roughly parallel
in a north-south line at approximately 75East (see
Figure99c, center). Other burials in this possible
row include two to the north (Burials137 and 165)
for which sex could not be determined, and another to
the south (Burial211) identified as a probable male.
A row of four mens graves lay to the east of the
women, two in coffins and two without (Burials194,
191, 174, and 158; see also Figure99c). Another
possible row of mens graves, mainly without coffins, lay somewhat further east (approximately at
130East; see Figure99d, within former Lot17) and
included, from north to south, Burials337, 354, 327,
369, 329, and 343. (A womans grave, Burial342,
intervened.)
These rows of adjacent burials of the same gender
are distinctive in comparison to the overall demographic
distribution within the excavated site (see Figure 7,
pocket map). The apparent nonrandom distribution
of men may be related to specific historical circumstances. Men from the barracks, for instance, may all
have been buried in a row if sickness claimed several
lives in quick succession. Infectious and contagious
diseases notoriously ravaged the troop barracks and
prisons during the occupation. The cluster of women
consists of only three individuals, so it may simply
be the random result of normal day-to-day cemetery
use. The possibility that gendered space within the
cemetery had a religious basis should be considered,
but there is no documentary or comparative evidence
to provide hypotheses.
Isolated Infants
No children were identified as having been buried
without coffins, and although many adults came
to the city from other geographical locales during
the final period of the burial grounds use, children
were likely to have had family members who could
provide for their funerals. On the other hand, there

were several spatially separate child burials in the
northern part of the excavated cemetery, suggesting
that these childrens families may not have had their
own places of burial within the cemetery. Detached
child burials in the northern area include Burials59,
58, and 86, in the rear of Lot12 (see Figure99b).
Although interred in an apparent north-south row, the
children are aligned with, but not clearly associated
with, any of the adult interments nearby. Burials173
and 190 similarly appear to be aligned in a row but not
definitely coupled with adult burials (see Figure99c,
approximately 100East), and Burials166, 187, and
386 may also fall into the category of detached
child burials that may be associated with rows. It
is possible, of course, that the children were placed
near adults with some specific association within the
apparent rows.
Even more isolated are Burials201, 138, 184, and
186, shown east to west on Figure99c, and Burials183
and 363, shown on Figure99d. Burials183, 184, and
186 (see Figures99c and 99d) lay within the central
part of Lot16 where few burials were found, and it is
possible that disturbances could have obliterated nearby
interments. But it would be unusual for these child
burials to have better preservation than those of adults.
Here is an area that may have been used specifically
for the burial of children.
The Area of the Animal-Bone Dump

Burialsin the area where animal bone (mainly cow
and likely tannery waste) had been dumped are shown
in Figure47 in Chapter 4). The faunal material found in
each grave shaft in this area is inventoried in AppendixE, Part3 of this volume. We examined the distribution of these graves in relation to the presence/
absence of coffins and in terms of burial superposition
to determine whether the tannery dump can provide
a relative dating sequence in the area. There were
23grave shafts containing significant amounts of
cow bone, and these must have been dug after the
dumping had occurred. Of these, 10 were adult burials
with coffins, 7 were adult burials without coffins, and
6 were childrens burials, the latter all with coffins.
Thus, both coffined and coffinless burials occurred
after the dumping episode(s). It is likely that the tannery dump dates to some time during the occupation.
Therefore, it is possible that some burials were placed
within the dump area during the occupation (coffinless)
and some burials were placed within the dump area
after the war, during the mid-1780s (coffined). There
were only two cases of burial superposition among

those with tannery waste. In one case, two burials,
coffinless Burial243 and coffined Burial241, both
truncated coffinless Burial185the coffined burial
may be the latest. In the second case, a coffinless
burial (Burial323) overlay a coffin burial (Burial354),
which would argue against a coffinless wartime vs.
coffined postwar sequence within the dump. However,
as we discuss in the section on unique and unusual burials, Burial323 is a unique interment, one that probably
occurred under inauspicious circumstances unrelated
to the war, probably in the mid- to late-1780s.
Area within Lot 17

A slight increase in the density of graves can be seen
in the small area that was excavated eastward of
grid line 120East. This is approximately the western
boundary of Lot17, surveyed originally in 1784 and
available for lease after 1787, when the Barclay property was subdivided. It is possible this lot continued
to be used for burials after 1788, whereas those to its
west did not, the latter having been fenced off (see
Chapter4). Another explanation for the increased
overlap in burials is topography: this may have been
one of those areas of flatter ground that was used more
intensively than the slope. Because the central and
northern portions of Lots17, 18, 20, and 21 were not
excavated fully, it is impossible to determine whether
the concentration of burials in these eastern lots supports the idea that they were used for a longer period
of time than Lots1216.

Burial 183: Head-to-East, Possible
Painted Coffin
Burial183 was one of two excavated child burials
with its head oriented toward the east rather than the
west (the other was Middle Group Burial406). The
grave, located in the north-central part of the site, held
a 612-month-old child in a tiny-shouldered coffin.
As noted, it was an isolate burial, with no apparent
relationship to any other. Coffin wood preservation
was excellent (Figure102), and samples were identified as cedar and spruce. Excavators noted flecks of
possible paint over the entire surface of the coffin lid
and a concentration of orange/red color on the north
Figure 102. In situ photograph of exposed coffin lid,

Burial 183. Ruler is marked in feet; north is to the left
(photograph by Dennis Seckler.
side.5 Fifteen straight pins were recorded in situ in the

burial, distributed the full length of the remains.
Burial 194: Wooden Grave Marker

A cedar board was attached to the head of the coffin
in Burial194. The vertical board was the remnant of a
grave marker that would have extended to the ground
surface, a unique find at the New York African Burial
Ground (Figure103; see Chapter5 on other types of
grave markers). The coffin, which was shouldered
and made at least partly of cedar, held a man aged
between 30 and 40years. His central incisors had been
filed. Tooth modification is sometimes interpreted as
a sign of birth in Africa, although tooth modification
in diaspora contexts should also be considered (see
Goodman etal. 2009 [Chapter6 of Skeletal Biology of
the New York African Burial Ground]). Burial artifacts
included a single copper-alloy button shank and an
Field records indicated that a sample was collected, but it was not
brought to the attention of the conservators or inventoried by the
Howard University Archaeology Team laboratory staff. Consequently,
the substance was never analyzed.
5
Figure 103. In situ photograph of Burial 194 showing

wood from the coffin bottom and the vertical board at the
head end (photograph by Dennis Seckler).
organic fragment, possibly a leather button cover,

found near the head of the right femur. Pollen analysis
suggested that flowers of the Liguliflorae family might
have been placed on the coffin.
Burial 196: Displaced Legs

and an Opened Coffin
Burial196 held the remains of an individual of undetermined sex whose calculated age range was from
20 to 24. The western end of the grave shaft and the
coffin had been disturbed, and the skeletal elements
from the upper body, although all accounted for, were
displaced and shifted eastward within the coffin. The
leg bones were found as shown in Figure104, as
though the legs had been severed at the knees, with
the tibiae and fibulae offset next to the femurs.
The state of the coffin in this burial may help
explain the disposition of the bones. Coffin lid nails

The possibility that the deceased had been dismembered at the knees prior to or after death is also
considered, though no visible cut marks were noted
by the Skeletal Biology Team. The positions of the
leg bones appear too precisely in tandem to have
simply slid into this arrangement when the coffin
was disturbed. It is also possible that the hands had
been behind the deceaseds back at the time of burial,
which would suggest possible execution.
The coffin bottom was of unusual construction (see
Chapter10). Instead of lengthwise boards, short crosswise boards had been used, nailed from the bottom
into the coffin sides. The unique coffin, possibly of ad
hoc construction, along with the apparent opening of
the receptacle some time after interment, the shifting
of the remains, and the disconcerting leg position,
suggest unusual circumstances surrounding the death
and burial of the individual in Burial196.
Burialswith Skeletal Elements Displaced:

Dismemberment and Dissection
Figure 104. In situ photograph of Burial 196. Ruler

alongside the burial is marked in feet; north is to the right
were found in place only at the foot corners; the other

lid nails appear to have been removed. A small pile of
nails was found alongside the north edge of the coffin,
near the top, and another cluster of nails was removed
from the corresponding area beneath the coffin. It is
possible the coffin was opened and the lid replaced
without the nails. The coffin may have been tipped
on end some time after decomposition, causing the
bones to shift toward the foot. This might account for
the position of the leg bones, providing the shifting
followed at least partial soft-tissue decomposition.6
Ubelaker (1974:2831) has analyzed frequencies of partial
disarticulation, reflecting the strength of muscle or ligament
attachments. Ubelakers (1974:28) results suggest that decomposition
produces separation first at the major joints such as the shoulder,
elbow, wrist, hip, and knee. Separation next occurs at the joints
between the sacrum and pelvis, bones of the hand, lower leg and
foot, radius and ulna, sacrum and fifth lumbar vertebrae, skull and
first cervical vertebrae, the lumbar segments, first and second cervical
vertebrae, skull and mandible, and the third to seventh cervical
segments. The thoracic vertebrae, tibia and fibula, and bones of the
feet are the last to become disarticulated.
6
Like Burial196, Burials151 and 364 contained skeletons with bones placed in puzzling ways. Burial151
held a man between 35 and 45years old. The coffin
was oriented with the head well to the southwest,
outside the typical range at the excavated cemetery.
Excavators noted that the right leg was turned backward (Figure105). It is possible the leg had been
severed (before or after death) and placed in the coffin
in this position. The mans incisors had been filed to
points. A single pin, found at the neck, was recovered
from the burial.
The bones in Burial364 were even more mystifyingly arranged. The remains were of a man between 25
and 35years old, buried with no coffin (Figure106).
The right ulna and radius (the bones of the forearm)
were found in the left lower leg area, end to end,
where the tibia should have been, and the left tibia
was rotated 180degrees and placed at the inside of
the left femur. The left arm bones were flexed at a
sharp angle. The left foot overlay the distal end of
the left fibula. The hand bones were found scattered
in the torso area. Skeletal analysis revealed indirect
evidence of a gruesome scenario: the left hand and
possibly the right, as well as the forearms, had been
severed near the time of the mans death. Old cuts or
abrasion of bone on the top of the left ulna and dark
cut marks consistent with a sharp blade on the top of
the left radius might have been made just before or
Figure 105. In situ drawing of Burial 151. North is to the right. Note
the southwesterly orientation. Scale is 1 inch = 2 feet (drawing by M.
Schur).
Figure 106. In situ drawing of Burial 364. The vertical line to the right of
the remains represents the edge of the grave shaft. The scale is 1 inch =
2 feet; north is to the right (drawing by W. Williams).
after death. Darkened blade cuts were also found on

the distal (hand) end of the left radius. This cannot be
a case of simple dismemberment, however. The left
fibula was in its correct anatomical position, but the
tibia was not, and the displaced, right lower-arm bones
were not adjacent to each other but laid end to end.
One explanation for the position of the bones is that
the remains represent a stolen cadaver (perhaps from
the burial ground) that had been partially dissected
and subsequently interred with the bones from the
severed elements. We cannot know who performed
the burial, but it is possible family and friends of
the deceased, or other citizens among the many who
decried the practice of dissection, retrieved the body
and laid it to rest. Because we know that African New
Yorkers assumed active vigilance over their dead (see
section entitled The Town and Chapter2), it is not
unreasonable to hypothesize that they made efforts to
retrieve bodies, which then would have been afforded
proper burial.
One other grave in the Late Group raises issues of
the appropriation of bodies after death. Burial323
held a man between 19 and 30years of age who had
been subjected to postmortem surgery during which
the top of the skull had been sawn off. He had been
placed in his grave with the top of his skull held in his
arms upon his torso (Figure107). It is possible that his
body had been obtained for dissection, and perhaps
the family or friends were able to retrieve the body
and bury it. It is also possible that a coroners inquest
had been performed on the body, as sectioning of the
cranium was typical of an autopsy in the eighteenth
century (Sledzik and Micozzi 1997:488; for archaeological examples from Great Britain, see Chamberlain
[1999]). The position of the body, with the head to
the east rather than the west, is very unusual (only
four instances were recorded at the New York African
Burial Ground), and supports the overall impression
of inauspicious circumstances of burial. So, too, may
the absence of a coffin.7
New York City coroner Thomas Shreves 1771 petition to the

Common Council for recovery of fees lists 20inquests performed
but does not indicate whether autopsies were undertaken. The petition
does itemize extra fees incurred for burials, and Shreve charged for
having to dig two graves himself. In only one case was there a charge
for a coffin, implying that the others were buried without coffins
(Municipal Archives of the City of New York, Papers of the Common
Council, Petitions, Thomas Shreve, April 19, 1771).
7
Figure 107. In situ photograph of Burial 323 skeletal

remains as found. The top of the skull was held in the
mans arms. Ruler is marked in feet; north is to the left
Chapter 10
Coffins
Jean Howson and Leonard G. Bianchi with the assistance of Iciar Lucena Narvaez
and Janet L. Woodruff
Coffin remains (wood and hardware) were by far the

most ubiquitous artifacts recovered from graves at
the New York African Burial Ground. In this chapter we report on the distribution of coffins among
demographic and temporal groups and examine the
historical context for coffin use. We then provide
descriptive information on the shapes, sizes, material,
construction, and decoration of coffins represented
at the excavated cemetery. Finally, we describe the
material remains that were recovered from coffins
and their treatment, identification, and quantification.
Presence/Absence of Coffins
As discussed in Chapter5, the vast majority of the
graves excavated at the New York African Burial
Ground had coffins (Table31, which includes burials for which presence or absence of a coffin could
be determined, whether or not human remains were
recovered). All of the childrens graves had coffins. Of
adults, 85.7percent of our sample (186 of 217adult
burials for which the presence or absence of a coffin could be determined) was buried in coffins. (See
Tables23, 25, 27, and 29 for coffin presence/absence
by individual burial.)
As discussed in Chapters4 and 9, the presence or
absence of a coffin co-varied with spatial location
within the excavated site and with the age and sex of
the deceasedthis patterning suggests that coffinless burial took place in the context of economic
and social disruptions during the Revolutionary
War and British military occupation of New York
(17761783). Prior to this, coffin burial appears to
have been the norm in the African community of

New York.1
In addition to the distribution of coffins by age,
sex, and temporal group, we examined coffin presence/absence in relation to other types of artifacts.
Burialswith coffins were much more likely to have
pins (205 of 301, or 68.1percent) than those without
coffins (6 of 31, or 20percent).2 It is possible that
the presence of a coffin enhanced the preservation
environment and therefore increased the survival
of pins. However, a more likely explanation for the
observed frequency distribution is that pins, like
lumber for coffins, were in short supply during the
war and/or that refugees who died during the British
occupation had no family to provide a shroud. As
noted in Chapter4, clothing and jewelry items were
present in clear association with the deceased in 6
coffinless burials, which argues against interpreting
the lack of a coffin as strictly a function of poverty.
Our specific historical explanation for coffinless burial as well as

our chronological sequence contrast with those advanced for Newton
Plantation in Barbados. There, the earliest (seventeenth century) rather
than the later (late eighteenth and early nineteenth century) burials
were without coffins, and change over time in mortuary practice,
with increasing adoption of coffins owing to European influence,
is suggested (Handler and Lange 1978:162, 192193). We do not
know if any of the burials excavated at the New York African Burial
Ground are as early as the earliest graves at Newton Plantationthe
earliest New York graves may have lain outside the excavated area. It
is possible that, as in Barbados, seventeenth-century African burials
in New York were without coffins, but our data do not speak to this
or to the issue of European influences on the use of coffins.
1
Percentages are based on 326burials (296 with coffins, 30 without)

where coffin presence/absence could be determined and preservation
was y, in addition to 5coffin burials and 1coffinless burial with
n preservation that also had pins.
2

Table 31. Coffin Presence or Absence, by Sex, Age, and Temporal Group
Burials
Count
Present
Percent
Absent
Total
Present
Absent
By Sex and Age

Adult male
83
22
105
79.0
21.0
Adult female
74
82
90.2
9.8
Adult, sex undetermined
29
Subadult, sex undetermined

Sex and age undetermined
Total
30
96.7
3.3
150
100.0
0.0
16 b
17
94.1
5.9
32
384 c
91.7
8.3
150
352
By Temporal Group
Early
49
50
98.0
2.0
Middle
172 a
175
98.3
1.7
Late-Middle
51
54
94.4
5.6
Late
79
25
104
76.0
24.0
Total
352 c
32
384 c, d
91.7
8.3
Excludes two subadults that were inside coffins shared with another individual.
Includes one possible coffin.
c
Burial 124 appears to have had a coffin and is included in the count but has not been assigned to a temporal group.
d
The total sample used to calculate this table includes burials for which presence or absence of a coffin could be
determined, whether or not human remains were recovered.
b
Clothing and jewelry were actually somewhat more

frequent proportionally in well-preserved coffinless
burials (6 out of 30, or 20percent) than in wellpreserved coffin burials (39 out of 284, or 13.7percent). It is possible that in some cases, the families
of the deceased actually sold clothing or other items
to pay for a proper funeral, defined as including a
coffin. The co-variance of coffin absence and burial
in clothing may support the idea that less investment
was made in the preparation of the body for burial
in these cases.
Coffin Production and Provision

Joiners, carpenters, and cabinetmakers typically built
coffins in colonial and early federal period American
towns. These artisans were sometimes also undertakers, providing other funeral accoutrements in addiThe New York African Burial Ground
tion to the coffin, as well as various services.3 The

men who made and sold coffins in New Amsterdam/
New York, and the enslaved and free laborers who
worked in their shops, would have followed the artisanal traditions of their home countries and regions. Coffins were used commonly in Europe by the middle of
the seventeenth century, and travelers accounts from
West Africa suggest their use there by the eighteenth
The more general term joiner referred to any woodworker. After
about 1760, the term cabinetmaker came to refer specifically to
men who made both furniture and coffins (Rauschenberg 1990:26).
Upholsterers also served as undertakers, although they did not build
the coffins. Bells and palls for the procession; portable biers and
coffin stools; decorations for the church; rings, scarves, and gloves
to give out to mourners; and funeral foods and beverages are some
of the items undertakers could provide. See Habenstein and Lamers
(1981) on the history of American undertaking. The first undertaker
to advertise in colonial New York was a woman, Blanche White, who
hailed from London and offered a range of services in 1768 (see the
advertisement in Gottesman [1938:141142]).
3
Chapter 10 . Coffins 215

century, though examples are known archaeologically only from the nineteenth century (Armstrong
1999:181). The ethnic backgrounds of coffin makers
probably reflected the diversity of the town as a whole,
and individual training and skill must have contributed to variation in coffin construction, so that coffin
styles might be expected to vary from shop to shop.
Still, based on historical and archaeological research,
there was a very limited range of basic coffin styles
used in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in
the American colonies and in Europe.
As Julian Litten (1991:88) points out, most specific
information on English coffins prior to the nineteenth century has been gathered from archaeological research and vault openings. Prints, drawings,
paintings, sculpture, trade cards, and advertisements
also can provide details, and Litten (1991:8990)
provides information on early coffin shapes used in
England based on such sources: gable-lidded coffins,
four sided and tapering toward the foot (i.e.,trapezoidal), are depicted for the fourteenth through the
seventeenth centuries. This style was also used in
seventeenth-century America, as evidenced at Carters
Grove (Nol Hume 1982). Gable-lidded, shouldered
coffins are found in England from about 1575.4 Litten (1991:99100, Plate11) states both that the latter
were common from 1600 to 1675 and that gablelidded, trapezoidal types gave way to shouldered,
flat-lidded types during 16601675. In his sample,
coffins from the period 17251775 were almost
without exception of the flat-lidded, shouldered
varietywhat we term hexagonal in this report.
Litten does not specifically discuss flat-lidded, trapezoidal coffins. It seems possible they were the less
expensive versions of the gable-lidded, trapezoidal
style. It should be noted that Nol Hume (1982:38)
had difficulty finding actual examples of gable-lidded
coffins from the seventeenth century and stated that
the hundreds of coffins he examined in London
vaults had lids made from a single, wide board, so
the flat-lidded variety may well have been the more
common. Nol Hume does not suggest dates for flatlidded, trapezoidal types.
If the shift to shoulder-shaped, flat-lidded coffins
was indeed virtually complete in England by 1725,
A surviving early example of the shouldered, gable-lidded coffin

in wood (Litten 1991:Color Plate11) is the Easingwold, Yorkshire,
parish coffin, dated to ca.1645, which has metal braces straddling
the gable ridge (it is not clear whether these are original, however).
The gable is quite shallow.
4
we may surmise that English cabinetmakers setting

up shop in New York after that date would have produced wares in this style. The trapezoidal (four-sided
tapering), flat-lidded coffins found at the New York
African Burial Ground may represent an earlier and/
or less expensive style, a simple style resulting from
lack of up-to-date training, or a style preferred by
non-English coffin makers. As noted, where graves
are superimposed, burials with four-sided, tapered
coffins usually predate burials with hexagonal-shaped
coffins, so the hypothesis that the style shifted from
the former to the latter over time is supported. If
nonartisans built coffins on an as-needed basis with
minimal tools and expertise, a simple style without
shoulder or gable may have resulted.
We know that at least in some cases, the master
of a household was expected to provide the coffin
for an enslaved member (and probably also for free
or indentured servants or other dependents). Blacks
who died at the Almshouse (presumably free persons
or enslaved persons who had been handed over to
the Almshouse when their slaveholders died) also
were provided coffins, as least during the 1750s.
Surviving records of New York cabinetmaker Joshua
Delaplaine, covering a period from 17521756, list
coffins made at his workshop (New-York Historical
Society, Joshua Delaplaine Papers, 17211779, 1815
1817, Day Book of Joshua Delaplaine, 17521756).
Delaplaine worked for a variety of customers, from
wealthy merchants to the Almshouse warden. Thirteen orders for coffins for Negroes were recorded
(Table32). A basic adult coffin cost 11 or 12shillings,
perhaps based on size. Charges for two childrens
coffins were 4shillings 6pence and 5shillings. The
less expensive one was painted black; it may have
been smaller in size.
Records from Charleston also indicate that coffins
were frequently blacked and that no other color was
used to paint them (Rauschenberg 1990:38). The black
paint apparently usually added 1shilling to the cost of
a coffin, screws and rosin added 1 or 2shillings each,
and an extra-large size increased the price by 1shilling. Thus Christopher Fells bondwoman received
the fanciest and most expensive of the Negroes
coffins at 14shillings; it included screws, rosin, and
paint (see Table32).
Compared with other entries in Delaplaines day
book, the prices paid for most of the blacks coffins
were at the very low end, reflecting the use of few
embellishments and presumably the less expensive
woods. Handles, breastplates or other lid decora-

Table 32. Coffins for Africans Made by Joshua Delaplaine, 17531756
Date
Person Placing Order
Description
Cost
(shillings and pence)
November 14, 1753
Joseph Ryal
coffin for his negro boy
10s
coffin for Jane a negro (poorhouse)
11s
January 22, 1754
Abraham Leffer[t]s
March 27, 1754
Robert Livingston
a large coffin for his negro
12s
April 30, 1754
Abraham Lefferts
coffin for Mo[lly?] a negro
11s
August 6, 1754
Christopher Fell
black coffin for his negro woman

rozind and with screws
14s
December 20, 1754
Daniel Gomez
coffin for his negro woman
12s
March 4, 1755
Caleb Lawrence
coffin for his negro child
5s
March 4, 1755
Robert Griffith
coffin for his negro man
12s
July 9, 1755
Christopher Fell
coffin for a negro woman
12s
July 19, 1755
Caleb Lawrence
rough coffin for Joseph Castins negro
9s
August 12, 1755
Estate of Peter Vergerau
coffin for negro woman w/screws
13s
August 27, 1755
Thomas Dobson
coffin for his negro girl
11s
February 29, 1756
John Stephens
black coffin for a negro child
4s 6d
Note: From New-York Historical Society, Joshua Delaplaine Papers, 17211779, 18151817, Day Book of Joshua
Delaplaine, 17521756.
a
Abraham Lefferts, one of the two city Church Wardens, placed numerous orders for coffins for the poorhouse, two of
which were for deceased black inmates.
tions, linings, and special wood increased the price

for many of the coffins Delaplaine furnished for
deceased whites. Examples include a childs coffin
4feet 3inches in length, covered and lined in Holland
cloth and trimmed with polisht nails for 3.10; a
coffin for a woman that was covered, fully trimmed,
and lined with sasinet for 5; bilsted (liquidambar)
coffins for children priced at 11shillings lined and
7shillings unlined; a mans coffin covered and lined
with a breastplate on the lid for 3.15; a childs coffin
lined and struck with name & age for 14shillings;
and a mans coffin of bilsted with a heart, name, age,
and date struck on the lid for 2.2. The term struck
probably refers to forming the letters and numerals
in nails or tacks.
At the very end of our period, the cost of a basic
coffin had apparently risen slightly. A 1796 price list
(Table33) informs us that they were sold in standard
lengths increasing in 6-inch increments. Prices were
set according to size, with the cost rising 1shilling
sixpence per 6inches of length up to 5feet.5 A shilling

was charged for putting on handles and a sixpence for
a breastplate (exclusive of the cost of these coffinfurniture items themselves).
The provision of a coffin may not always have
been the duty of a household head. For somemaybe
mostenslaved Africans and for free persons, it might
have fallen to family and friends to see to the coffin.
The prices listed would have had to be paid to the
woodworking shops; otherwise, materials and labor
would have had to be donated. Many blacks worked
for and as cabinetmakers and carpenters in early New
The coffin prices, from the Cabinet-Makers Philadelphia and

London Book of Prices, are reprinted in Rauschenberg (1990:34).
Because we do not know the types of wood represented in either
the Delaplaine accounts for Negroes coffins or the 1796 price list,
we cannot be certain whether the price differential was contingent
on inflation, different materials, or a change in the availability of
wood.
5

Table 33. Coffin Prices, 1796
Coffin Features
Cost
(shillings and pence)
2-foot length
6s 6d
2-foot-6-inch length
8s
3-foot length
9s 6d
10s 6d
4-foot length
5-foot length
12s
13s 6d
15s
Above 5-foot length
18s
Above 5 feet of poplar, deduct
3s
Application of handles
1s
Application of breastplate
Full trimming with lace
6d
1s 6d
Note: From Rauschenberg (1990:34).
York, so their access to tools and materials may have

been relied on.
In addition, participation in own-account economic
activities would have afforded some the means of
purchasing coffins outright. Also, as suggested in
Chapter2, the existence of informal burial societies
probably predates the formal establishment, in the late
eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, of mutual
aid societies in New York. The primary benefit of such
societies would have been the provision of a proper
burial with a coffin.
Coffin Variation at the New York

African Burial Ground
Coffin Shape
As shown in Chapter4, coffin shapes at the New
York African Burial Ground were shouldered (hexagonal), tapered (sometimes called trapezoidal),
and rectangular. Many small and poorly preserved
examples are simply listed in the database as foursided (i.e.,although the shoulder bend could be
ruled out, it could not be determined whether they
were rectangular or trapezoidal). One exception
(Burial257) appeared to be eight sided, the head
comprised of two boards that came to a point. Many

coffins that were poorly preserved were tallied as
tentative (indicated by a question mark). Table34
lists coffin shapes, including uncertain ones, by
general age category.6
Some of the coffins had footboards that sloped
outward toward the top. Fourteen of these were made
note of and drawn in cross section at the time they
were excavated (a drawing is reproduced in the section
on coffin construction), and examination of drawings
for in situ nail locations indicates there were at least
five additional examples. This feature was found in
coffins of both tapered and shouldered varieties and
in all time periods. It was probably a common variant. The sloped-foot coffins identified thus far were
in Burials23, 31, 40, 44, 48, 51, 68, 71, 100, 122,
130, 145, 151, 241, 266, 299, 321, 342, 354, 416,
and 418.
There was no evidence of gable-lidded coffins
at the New York African Burial Ground. Such coffins would have had a distinctive pattern of nails
aligned down the centerline of the lid, as did those
at the seventeenth-century Martins Hundred site in
Virginia (Nol Hume 1982:3839, 70), and either
the headboards and footboards would have been
gable shaped, or the lids would have had gable ends.
Hexagonal, gable-lidded forms in North America
seem to date to the nineteenth as well as the seventeenth century. Fourteen of 19identifiable coffin
shapes from Philadelphias First African Baptist
Cemetery excavation were gable lidded (Parrington
etal. 1989:144). Gabled coffins are more complex
in construction, requiring additional boards and
five-sided ends. We were particularly interested in
determining whether any of the four-sided coffins we
believe to be earliest had gable lids. Field drawings
for all of the four-sided coffins from our sample were
examined carefully for evidence of this form, but
none was found. In the best-preserved and recorded
examples (Burials18, 23, 68, 78, 177, 202, 221,
and 282see drawings in Part2 of this volume),
the headboards and footboards had straight-cut top
edges, and no centerline nails were found. There
is no evidence that headboards or footboards were
shaped to fit a gable lid.
The identification of four-sided, tapering (trapezoidal) adult coffins as earlier than hexagonal coffins
is based on analysis of archaeological data, mainly
Two subadults were buried inside coffins that held another individual.
(These coffins were counted once in Table34.)
6

Table 34. Coffin Shape, by Age Category
Shape
Adult
Subadult
Undetermined
Total
Four sided
15
24
Four sided?
Tapered
20
13
33
Tapered?
Rectangle
16
20
Rectangle?
164
20
Hexagonal
109
53
Hexagonal?
15
Other
Unidentifiable
38
34
Total
186
150
16
1
b
81
352 c
Excludes two subadults that were inside coffins shared with another individual.
Includes one possible coffin.
c
The total sample used to calculate this table includes burials for which a coffin was
determined to be present, whether or not human remains were recovered.
b
stratigraphic relationships.7 Information on changing

coffin shape over time, although not conclusive, supports the use of shape to seriate the coffins and of the
trapezoidal variant to characterize the earliest group.
Thus all adult coffins of the Early Group were, by
definition, four sided, mainly tapered, although two
were identified as possibly rectangular, and eight can
only be characterized as four-sided. For later groups,
adult coffin shapes (when clearly defined) were mostly
hexagonal, with just four exceptions: two from the
Late-Middle Group were rectangular, one from the
Late Group was possibly rectangular, and one Late
Group coffin (Burial207) appeared to be tapered.
Coffins of children were much more varied in shape
than coffins of adults. And, although the numbers are
small, the distribution of coffin shape by age of child
(Figure108) suggests that the coffins of infants and
young children were more varied in shape than the
coffins of older children. Also, although hexagonal
coffins were the most common shape for children
in the Middle to Late Groups, four-sided varieties
As discussed in Chapter4, we initially thought that all four-sided
adult coffins might have been in use earlier in our sequence than those
that were six sided, but upon examination of the stratigraphic evidence,
the rectangular variant appeared to be used later as well.
7
remained in use, accounting for 23.7percent of the

total (Figure109). We suggest that the shape of childrens coffins was less standardized than the shape
of adult coffins because childrens coffins were more
likely to be made by families rather than purchased
from workshops. Coffins for the youngest children
and infants were most likely to be homemade.
Coffin Size
Coffin measurements (maximum length and width)
were recorded in the field for most burials, but because
we were only interested in tabulating sizes of whole
coffins, we used the final burial drawings to obtain
length, width, and head-to-shoulder measurements.
This information is presented in AppendixJ, Part3
of this volume. The distribution of coffin lengths is
shown in Figure110. One question that we wished to
address was whether coffins seemed to be constructed
to orderin other words, made to measurefor
individuals or, alternatively, whether they represented
standard sizes built from a limited set of templates or
kept in stock by coffin makers. There was a high degree
of variation in coffin size, suggesting that either numerous templates were used and/or that coffins were built
to accommodate the measurement of the deceased.
Figure 108. Shapes of childrens and infants coffins by age bracket.
Figure 109. Shapes of childrens and infants coffins by temporal group.
For 88individuals with measurable coffins, stature could also be calculated (stature data supplied
by Sue Goode-Null of the Skeletal Biology Team).
Figures111 and 112 show the relationship between
stature and coffin size in two ways. The average difference between the calculated stature of the deceased
and the coffin length was 0.52feet, or approximately
6inches. The average ratio of length to stature was

1.12, with a standard deviation of 0.1. The covariance
of coffin size and stature is clear. Yet it can be seen
that for individuals of approximately equal height,
coffin lengths could vary by as much as a foot or
more. For example, for 12individuals whose height
was calculated at approximately 5.6 feet, coffins
Figure 110. Distribution of coffins by length. Includes only coffins that could be measured for length. Rounded to nearest 0.1 feet.
Figure 111. Coffin length compared to calculated stature of the deceased.
were from 0.3feet shorter to 1.3feet longer than the

deceased.
Owing to the margin of error in calculating both
stature and coffin length, we hesitate to draw conclusions about coffin production. However, we would
suggest that the coffin maker was given at least an
approximate height and built the coffin a few inches
longer. For six-sided coffins, the closest template
was probably used, whereas for four-sided shapes,
the wood may have been measured and cut without
a template (see below for a discussion of coffin construction).
Coffin widths as measured in the field ranged from

just under half a foot to over 2feet. It is likely some
splaying occurred during decay. There were 83cases
for which coffins measured greater than 18inches
wide and 8 where coffin remains measured 2feet
wide or more. In the case of the longest and widest
coffin measured, from Burial47 (at 2.3feet wide by
7.3feet long), it is possible the ground had shifted,
displacing the sides. One other extra-wide coffin,
that of Burial376, appears to have been built that way,
and it is possible the man interred in it was heavyset
(Figure113).
Figure 112. Coffin length in relation to calculated stature of the deceased, by shape.
The ratio of length to width ranged from 1.6 to 6.4,

increasing with the coffin length, although for coffins
5feet long or longer, the length was typically between
3 and 5times the width. The only outliers were the
coffins of Burials387 and 388 (Figure114). These
two were slightly tapered and exceptionally narrow,
just less than 1foot wide although 6feet long, and
they were in adjacent graves. The same maker probably crafted both.
Coffin Wood
There were 104coffins at the New York African
Burial Ground for which at least one wood sample was
identified in the laboratory. The number of coffins with
each type of wood or combination of woods is listed in
Table35, with percentages shown in Figure115, and
all identified samples are listed by burial in Table36.
Tables and figures follow showing the frequencies of
woods by coffin shape and by temporal group.
The most frequently identified woods were varieties

of cedar. Because this wood is the slowest to rot of the
soft woods, more samples of it may have been retrievable archaeologically, and its predominance may be
the result of sampling error. All coffins that yielded
identified samples, with the exception of one, were
built of soft woods. Cedar, pine, and spruce were the
top three woods in all time periods (Table37). However, although all three were approximately equal in
the Early Group, cedar and pine clearly predominated
by the Middle Group, and in the Late Group, cedar was
the clear favorite, barring sampling error. Research
on the relative availability of these woods over time
would be needed to determine whether wood can be
used as a temporal indicator. Coffins made of combinations of different woods made up similar proportions
of the sample in each temporal group, suggesting that
expediency dictated the selection.
The one hardwood coffin identified, from Burial290,
was of black walnut. There was no other distinguishing
Figure 113. Drawing in situ

of Burial 376. The coffin was
3 feet wide at its shoulder.
It held the remains of
a 4565-year-old man
(drawing by M. Schur).
in our sequence and both of men. One, in Burial101,

was one of the very few decorated coffins at the New
York African Burial Ground.
The wood types were used in similar proportions
for adult and childrens coffins (Table38). The only
two coffins made of yew (a tough but flexible softwood) were childrens coffins, whereas the other
infrequent woods (fir, larch, and black walnut) were
all in adult coffins.
Table39 shows the distribution of woods by coffin
shape. The rank order among the top three woods is
essentially the same, but it was mainly the hexagonal
coffins that used combinations of woods, and the least
frequent woods were all found in hexagonal coffins.
Coffin Construction
Historical sources and analysis of surviving examples
from opened vaults indicate the following construction
method and details for plain, flat-lidded, shouldered
coffins (Litten 1991:9092; Julien Litten, personal
communication 1999; Salaman 1997:150):
Figure 114. Drawings depicting unusually narrow coffins: left, Burial

387; right, Burial 388. The two graves were adjacent and precisely
aligned. Scale is 1 inch = 2 feet; north is to the right (drawings by M.
Schur).
feature of the coffin, and there were no artifacts found

in association with the deceased other than a single
straight pin on the cranium. It is perhaps significant
that the deceased was a man between 45years and
55years old, one of the older individuals in the sample
population. The burial is assigned to the Late-Middle
Group. Larch (also called tamarack) was identified in
only two coffins, from Burials97 and 101, both later
The coffin bottom and top were marked using a

template and sawed.
The sideboards were soaked and while damp were
kerfed on the inside at the shoulders with six or
seven crosscuts sawn almost through the boards.
The headboards and footboards were nailed to the
bottom.
The sideboards were bent around the bottom board
and nailed (or sometimes screwed for strength) in
place. The bottom, headboards, and footboards
were set inside the sides.
The head of the coffin was 2(or a few) inches
wider than the foot.
Corners were butt jointed.
The lid spanned the sides (thus the lid would have
been larger than the bottom, which was inset).
The inside was sometimes coated with pitch to seal
the joints.
Construction of the tapered and rectangular shapes
would have followed the same steps, minus the soaking and kerfing of the sides, and probably would not
have required a template. Surviving evidence, such
as the locations and the orientations of nails, of the
majority of coffins at the New York African Burial
Ground, appears consistent with this basic construction method. There were a few coffins, however, that
deviated from the standard.

Table 35. Categories of Coffin Wood
Category
Sample Identifications
Cedar
cedar
31
red cedar
cedar, red cedar
eastern red cedar
cedar, eastern red cedar
white cedar
cedar, eastern white pine
cedar, pine
cedar, red pine
cedar, pine, eastern white pine
red cedar, eastern white pine
Cedar/spruce
cedar, spruce
Pine
pine
11
eastern white pine
red pine
red pine?
pine, red pine
sugar pine, pine
loblolly pine
pine, loblolly (soft pine)
Pine/spruce
pine, spruce
Spruce
spruce
white spruce
white spruce, red (eastern) spruce
fir
balsam fir
Fir/pine
fir, eastern white pine
Fir/pine/spruce
eastern white pine, Scots pine,

white spruce, fir
Larch
larch
Yew
yew
Walnut
black walnut
Cedar/pine
Fir
Number of Coffins
Figure 115. Frequencies of identified coffin woods.
The coffins in adjacent Burials23 and 68 were

virtually identical; the bottom board had been nailed
into the sides rather than vice versa, so that vertical
nails pointed upward (Figure116). The coffins were
four sided, tapering toward the foot, the walls sloping outward at the top. Around the perimeter, vertical
nails attached the lid to the sides; there were four nails
at each corner of the head attaching the sides to the
headboard and three at each corner of the foot attaching the sides to the footboard. These two coffins were
probably from the same maker.
Our evidence points strongly to the use of single
boards for lids and bottoms, but there were at least two
exceptions. Eighteen inches is a width that, according to Nol Hume (1982:38), would have posed no
problem to colonial... sawyers. As noted, however,
83coffins were measured as wider than 18inches.
The use of narrower and presumably cheaper boards
for lids and bottoms might be expected in these cases,
but the boards would have to have been cross braced.
There was only one coffin (in Burial352) in which the
bottom had a batten nailed to it crosswise for support
and one coffin (in Burial392) in which at least two
crosspieces were nailed onto the lid (Figures117 and
118). The apparent excess width of so many of the

other coffins in our sample may be because of splaying, resulting in inaccurate measurement.
One uniquely constructed hexagonal coffin was
found. For the coffin bottom of Burial196, instead of
a lengthwise board, numerous short crosswise boards
had been used, and these were nailed from the bottom
into the coffin sides (Figure119). The lid and bottom
were identified as pine, the sides as cedar. Several
other coffins (in Burials237, 250, 258, and 361) had
the bottoms nailed from the bottom up into the sides,
and although no crosswise boards were preserved well
enough to be noted in the field, it is possible these
too had more than one board forming the coffin floor.
Alternatively, this is simply a variant construction
method, possibly with the bottom attached after the
sides, head, and foot had been joined.
Finally, Burial194 had the only coffin for which
a wooden marker had been nailed to the headboard
(Figure120; see Figure103 in Chapter 9).
Nail Locations
Nail locations based on drawings were recorded for
a subset of coffins, those that were complete and
Figure 116. Renderings of coffins: (a) Burial 23; (b) Burial 68. The coffin bottoms were nailed into the
headboards and footboards from the bottom up. Scale is 1 inch = 2 feet (drawing by B. Ludwig).
Figure 117. Possible reconstruction of the Burial 352

coffin bottom. The crosspiece may have been made of
two butted boards. It was not possible to determine
whether the piece was on the outside (center sketch) or
the inside (bottom sketch) of the coffin. Scale is 1 inch =
2 feet (reconstruction by B. Ludwig).
Figure 118. The lid of the coffin in Burial 392: top, field
sketch; bottom, on-site reconstruction. Two crosspieces
were nailed to the top of the lid board or boards. Scale is
1 inch = 2 feet (reconstruction by B. Ludwig).
Figure 119. Possible reconstruction of the Burial 196

coffin showing unusual bottom construction. Numerous
boards had been nailed crosswise. Scale is 1 inch = 2 feet
(reconstruction by B. Ludwig).
Figure 120. In situ photograph of

the board nailed to the head of
the coffin in Burial 194. The board,
a grave marker, was of cedar
had what appeared to be the best in situ recordation

(Table40). Many nails were found at the corner joints
of the coffins, as expected, because the strength of the
box depended on these joints. There were also usually
two or three (sometimes four) nails along the bottom
of the footboard and headboard, attaching these boards
to the bottom, as well as several along the sides.8 There
were far fewer top nails than bottom nails, also to be
expected, as the lid added some support but mainly
just had to be nailed shut.
The presence of horizontally oriented nails at the
top of a coffin along its sides would indicate that the
lid was inset and was nailed from the sides, although
vertically oriented nails would indicate that the lid
was nailed from the top and therefore overlapped the
A study of a sample of seven coffins for which nails were recorded
in situ at a small late-eighteenth- to early-nineteenth-century rural
family cemetery in Delaware also indicated clearly that the majority
of nails were used at the head and foot (LeeDecker 2001:6).
8
edges of the side boards, headboards, and footboards.

The latter pattern reflects typical coffin construction
as described above.
Coffins with inset lids are documented,9 but no
evidence of any beading or cleats that could have
supported inset lids was found for coffins at the New
York African Burial Ground. Therefore, burials where
records showed horizontal and top nails were reexamined carefully. In some cases, close examination
of in situ photographs led to the conclusion that all
Inset lids are recorded for expensive, lead-lined, triple-shell coffins.
Describing the inner coffin of typical surviving triple-shell coffins in
vault and intramural graves in England, Litten (1991:101) has noted
that the lids were recessed, supported by a length of beading that was
glued and tacked around the upper inner sides. At the College Landing
site in Williamsburg, it was concluded from nail placement that the
coffin lids were attached with nails placed horizontally into the six
sides, but no discussion is offered regarding the specific construction
method or whether the lids would have been inset (Hudgins 1977:64).
The burials, all thought to be of African Americans, were dated from
1790 to 1820 based on the machine-cut nail shanks.
9

Table 36. Burials with Identified Coffin Wood
Sex
Temporal
Group
Coffin
Shape
Catalog
No.
Sample
Location
30
male?
Late
hexagonal
00219-CWA
lid/side
eastern
white pine
30
40
male?
LateMiddle
bottom
cedar
adult
35
45
female
Late
rectangular?
00253-CWA
lid
cedar
15
subadult
11
18
undetermined
Late
unidentifiable
00286-CWA
unspecified
red pine
17
subadult
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
00357-CWA
lid
yew
18
adult
35
45
female?
Early
tapered
00310-CWA
lid
red cedar
22
subadult
undetermined
Middle
unidentifiable
00344-CWA
bottom
pine
00344-CWB
unspecified
pine
00383-CWA
and CWB
unspecified white spruce
00383-CWC
unspecified
red
(eastern)
spruce
Middle unidentifiable
00353-CWA
unspecified
pine
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
00378-CWA
unspecified
pine
male?
Early
tapered
00381-CWA1
side
white spruce
Burial
No.
Age
Category
Low
Age
High
Age
adult
25
11
adult
12
23
adult
25
adult
27
subadult
29
adult
2.5
25
20
1.4
35
4.5
35
24
2.8
45
male
female
Early
hexagonal 00267-CWACWD
tapered
00381-CWA2
34
adult
35
subadult
36
adult
37
adult
45
38
adult
40
adult
41
adult
Wood
undetermined
Early
rectangular?
00427-CWA
bottom?
fir
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
00458-CWA
unspecified
red pine
female
Late
unidentifiable
00459-CWA
unspecified
cedar
55
male
Late
hexagonal
00460-CWA
lid/side
cedar
12
18
female
Early
tapered
00461-CWA
unspecified
spruce
50
60
female
Late
hexagonal
00489-CWA
unspecified
eastern
white pine
00525-CWA
lid
sugar pine
00525-CWB
lid
pine
00525-CWC
bottom
pine
00605-CWA
unspecified
fir
10
undetermined
female?
46
adult
47
adult
35
45
male
Middle
hexagonal?
00619-CWA
unspecified
spruce
49
adult
40
50
female
Middle
hexagonal
00641-CWA
unspecified
cedar
50
subadult
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
00649-CWA
interior
spruce
00649-CWB
lid, bottom
pine
00649-CWC
unspecified
pine

Table 36. Burials with Identified Coffin Wood (continued)
Burial
No.
Age
Category
54
adult
57
subadult
0.88
58
subadult
3.5
63
adult
64
subadult
67
adult
Low
Age
35
High
Age
40
Temporal
Group
Coffin
Shape
Catalog
No.
Sample
Location
Wood
undetermined
Late- unidentifiable
Middle
00726-CWA
unspecified
cedar
2.16
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
00796-CWA
unspecified
cedar
4.5
undetermined
Late
rectangular
00797-CWA1
bottom
red pine
male
Late
hexagonal
00805-CWA
bottom
cedar
00805-CWB
side
pine
00803-CWA
unspecified
pine
00810-CWA
unspecified
eastern
white pine
00810-CWB
unspecified
fir
45
0.38
Sex
0.88
50
undetermined
male
LateMiddle
hexagonal
Late- unidentifiable
Middle
68
adult
21
25
male
Early
tapered
00807-CWA
unspecified
cedar
69
adult
30
60
male
Middle
hexagonal?
00808-CWA
unspecified
spruce
70
adult
35
45
male
Middle
hexagonal
00812-CWA
unspecified
cedar
71
adult
25
35
female
Late
hexagonal
00813-CWA
unspecified
cedar
77
subadult
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
00820-CWA
unspecified
pine
82
adult
00825-CWA
unspecified
red pine
83
infant
undetermined
Early?
rectangular
00826-CWA
85
subadult
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
00831-CWA
unspecified
cedar
89
adult
female
LateMiddle
hexagonal
00830-CWA
unspecified
spruce
91
subadult
undetermined
LateMiddle
hexagonal
00834-CWA
unspecified
eastern red
cedar
94
subadult
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
00837-CWA
unspecified
cedar
96
adult
16
18
male
Middle
hexagonal
00839-CWA2
unspecified
eastern
white pine
97
adult
40
50
male
Late
hexagonal
00840-CWA
unspecified
larch
101
adult
26
35
male
LateMiddle
hexagonal
00843-CWA1
unspecified
larch
107
adult
35
40
female
LateMiddle
hexagonal
00850-CWA
unspecified
fir
108
subadult
0.25
0.75
undetermined
LateMiddle
hexagonal
00851-CWA
unspecified
pine
109
subadult
0.67
1.33
undetermined
LateMiddle
hexagonal
00852-CWA
unspecified
pine
122
adult
female
Middle
hexagonal
00867-CWA
unspecified
eastern
white pine
126
subadult
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
00871-CWA
lid
spruce
0.67
18
1.3
25
0.25
50
0.75
60
0.67
18
1.3
20
3.5
5.5
female

Burial
No.
Age
Category
Low
Age
128
infant
130
subadult
Sex
Temporal
Group
Coffin
Shape
Catalog
No.
Sample
Location
Wood
0.17
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
00873-CWA
unspecified
cedar
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
00875-CWA
unspecified
eastern
red cedar
00875-CWB
unspecified
cedar
High
Age
137
adult
25
35
undetermined
Late
unidentifiable
00882-CWA
unspecified
pine
147
adult
55
65
male
Late
hexagonal
00892-CWA
all
white cedar
153
adult
female?
Late
hexagonal
00898-CWA
unspecified
cedar
159
adult
female
Middle
hexagonal
00905-CWA1
unspecified
cedar
00905-CWA2
unspecified
red pine
00931-CWA
lid
pine
00931-CWB
side
spruce
171
adult
25
44
35
60
male
Late
hexagonal
174
adult
17
18
male
Late
hexagonal
00940-CWA
unspecified
cedar
177
adult
30
60
undetermined
Early
tapered
00946-CWA
lid
eastern
white pine
182
subadult
7.5
12.5
undetermined
Early
tapered
00970-CWA
unspecified
cedar
183
subadult
0.63
undetermined
Late
hexagonal
00971-CWA
unspecified
cedar
00971-CWB
side
spruce
00971-CWC
side
cedar
00987-CWA
lid
spruce peg
01015-CWA
unspecified
cedar
01109-CWA
unspecified
cedar
01109-CWD
post
cedar
186
infant
189
adult
194
adult
1.13
0.17
undetermined
undetermined
30
40
male
Late
hexagonal
Late
hexagonal
195
adult
30
40
female
Late
hexagonal
01151-CWA
unspecified
red cedar
196
adult
20
24
undetermined
Late
hexagonal
01150-CWA
and CWE
side
cedar
01150-CWB
lid
pine
01150-CWC
lid
eastern
white pine
01150-CWG
bottom
pine
cedar
200
adult
202
adult
206
subadult
208
subadult
0.5
212
subadult
4.5
213
adult
12
45
male
Early
four-sided
01165-CWA
unspecified
female?
Early
tapered
01171-CWA
undetermined
Middle
rectangular
01180-CWA
unspecified
red pine
undetermined
Late
unidentifiable
01182-CWA
bottom
cedar
5.5
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal?
01189-CWA
unspecified
yew
female
Middle
hexagonal
01190-CWA
unspecified
red cedar
18
55

Low
Age
High
Age
Sex
Temporal
Group
Coffin
Shape
Catalog
No.
Sample
Location
Wood
adult
45
55
male
Late
hexagonal
01191-CWA
unspecified
balsam fir
221
adult
30
60
male
Early
tapered
01206-CWA
unspecified
pine
228
adult
male?
Late
hexagonal
01214-CWA
bottom
cedar
236
subadult
undetermined
Late
hexagonal
01222-CWA
bottom
loblolly
(soft pine)
01222-CWB
and CWC
side
pine
Burial
No.
Age
Category
214
237
undetermined
242
adult
40
244
subadult
246
subadult
247
adult
259
adult
263
subadult
265
subadult
268
infant
270
adult
272
subadult
277
subadult
undetermined
Early
four-sided?
01223-CWA
lid
red pine
50
female
Late
hexagonal
01229-CWA
unspecified
spruce
undetermined
Late
unidentifiable
01231-CWA
unspecified
cedar
0.5
2.9
undetermined
Middle
four-sided
01234-CWA
bottom
cedar
49.9
male?
Early?
unidentifiable
01236-CWA
lid
cedar
01236-CWB
bottom
eastern
white pine
01236-CWE,
CWG, CWI, CWJ
lid
pine
01249-CWA
unspecified
cedar
01249-CWB
unspecified
pine
35
17
19
female?
Late
hexagonal
undetermined
Early
tapered
01257-CWA
unspecified
cedar
0.5
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal?
01261-CWA
unspecified
cedar
0.5
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal?
01264-CWA
unspecified
pine
01266-CWA
lid
cedar
01268-CWA
unspecified
cedar
01274-CWA
lid
eastern
white pine
01274-CWB
bottom
cedar
red pine
male
0.25
0.75
undetermined
undetermined
283
subadult
0.33
290
adult
45
306
adult
310
0.67
Early
four-sided
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
01302-CWA
bottom/lid
55
male
LateMiddle
hexagonal
01324-CWA
unspecified black walnut
28
44
male
Middle
hexagonal
01474-CWA
unspecified
spruce
adult
44
52
female
Middle
hexagonal
01486-CWA
bottom
red pine?
313
adult
45
55
male
Late
hexagonal
01516-CWA
bottom
eastern
white pine
315
adult
30
40
female
Middle
hexagonal?
01519-CWA
lid
cedar
01519-CWB
and CWC
bottom
cedar

Burial
No.
Age
Category
Low
Age
High
Age
316
adult
18
20
328
adult
40
50
333
adult
45
55
340
adult
39.3
64.4
Temporal
Group
Coffin
Shape
Catalog
No.
Sample
Location
Wood
female
LateMiddle
hexagonal
01521-CWA
lid
cedar
female
Middle
hexagonal
01589-CWA
unspecified
red cedar
01589-CWB
lid
red cedar
01589-CWC
side
cedar
Sex
male
LateMiddle
rectangular
01613-CWA
bottom
loblolly pine
female
Early
tapered
01651-CWA
and CWB
side
eastern
white pine
01651-CWC
and CWE
bottom
red cedar
01651-CWD
lid
eastern
white pine
342
adult
25
35
female?
Late
hexagonal
01660-CWA
unspecified
pine
354
adult
35
45
male
Late
hexagonal
01742-CWA
unspecified
eastern
white pine
01742-CWB
side
white spruce
01742-CWC
lid
fir
01742-CWD
unspecified
fir
01742-CWE
unspecified
Scots pine
363
subadult
undetermined
Late
hexagonal
01825-CWA
bottom
cedar
384
adult
25
45
female
Middle
hexagonal
01955-CWB
bottom
red pine
01955-CWC
side
red pine
02008-CWA
lid
red pine
02008-CWB
lid
pine
02039-CWA
unspecified
cedar
02039-CWB
side
pine
02066-CWA
lid/side?
spruce
02066-CWB
lid
cedar
388
392
402
adult
adult
29
42.5
57
52.5
adult
female
male
undetermined
Early
LateMiddle
Early
tapered
rectangular
tapered
415
adult
35
55
male
Middle
hexagonal
02097-CWA
bottom
cedar
419
adult
48
62
male
Middle
hexagonal
02104-CWA
side
spruce

Table 37. Number of Coffins Made of Each
Wood Type, by Temporal Group
Wood Category
Early
Middle
LateMiddle
Late
Cedar
15
13
Pine
14
Spruce
Cedar/pine
Cedar/spruce
Pine/spruce
Pine (loblolly)
Fir
Fir/pine
Fir/pine/spruce
Larch
Yew
Walnut
Total
19
40
14
31
Table 38. Number of Coffins Made of Each

Wood Type, by Age Category
Wood
Category
Adult Subadult Infant Undetermined
Cedar
24
13
Pine
15
11
Spruce
10
Cedar/pine
Cedar/spruce
Pine/spruce
Pine (loblolly)
Fir
Fir/pine
Fir/pine/spruce
Larch
Yew
Walnut
Total
68
32
of the top nails were in fact vertical. In other cases,

the horizontal nails in question did not appear at all in
the photographs. Top nails were sometimes removed
during excavation and therefore were not present at
the time the final burial photographs were taken and
drawings rendered. The illustrators had to rely on
the excavators recollections of nail locations. We
conclude that the depictions of lid nails on the in
situ drawings are less reliable than those of bottom
nails. The depicted orientations of nails that had been
removed probably were not always accurate. It also
is possible that some nails were never drawn at all,
although the number of nails depicted in some drawings was greater than the number of nails counted in
the laboratory (using nail heads to arrive at minimum
numbersAppendixJ, Part3 of this volume, lists all
burials with minimum nail counts from the laboratory
inventory).
Screws
We know that the use of screws in coffins added to the
cost (by about a shilling at mid-century), so an attempt
was made to examine the distribution of these hardware
items. Unfortunately, the severe corrosion of all coffin
hardware made the identification of screws difficult,
especially in the field during excavationthere were
only three burials in which screws were recorded on
the field drawings (Figure121). In the laboratory, some
screws were identified through visual inspection after
minimal mechanical cleaning, but numerous items
that could not be clearly identified as either nails or
screws were set aside for X-rays and were lost when
the laboratory was destroyed. Screws were recovered and identified from 31coffins, and there were
possible screws from 1other. Their distribution is
presented in Table41. Coffins of young children and
men and women of all ages are represented. Almost
all of the coffins where screws were used were hexagonal, doubtless because extra strength was needed
at the joints because of the bent sideboards. The only
Early Group coffins with screws were from Burials72
and 83, but this shared grave had been disturbed by
a foundation, and the screws, which lacked specific
provenience, might have been intrusive, or the burials
might be incorrectly assigned to the Early Group. The
lack of screws in early burials is probably attributable
to the lack of hexagonal coffins. As noted, tapered
coffins of the Early Group generally had more nails
at the joints, and a change in joinery accompanying
the change in style is suggested.

Table 39. Number of Coffins Made of Each Wood Type, by Shape
Wood Category Tapered
Four
Sided
Rectangular
Hexagonal
Unidentifiable
Cedar
22
Pine
15
Spruce
Cedar/pine
Cedar/spruce
Pine/spruce
Pine (loblolly)
Fir
Fir/pine
Fir/pine/spruce
Larch
Yew
Walnut
Total
13
58
25
Questionable cases for each shape (e.g., tapered?) are counted as unidentifiable in this tabulation.
Figure 121. Example of a coffin

with screws recorded in situ.
The drawing is of Burial 321,
which held the remains of a
child 12 years old. One screw
attached the right side to the
footboard and two others
attached the left side board
to the bottom. Scale is 1 inch
= 1 foot; north is to the right
(drawing by W. Williams).
In most cases, only a single screw was identified,

and numerous nails were also present in every case.
Although we are likely to have missed screws because
of poor preservation and the loss of information from
items that were never X-rayed, New York African
Burial Ground coffins were clearly built mainly with
nails. Screws were apparently usually employed on
an as-needed basis during coffin construction rather
than being used, per order, instead of nails. The few
screws that were recorded in situ were at the corner
joints (Burials225 and 321) or at the top and oriented
vertically to attach the lid (Burials286 and 321).
The joints may have occasionally required screws
for strengthfor instance, if warped boards were used.
Another possible use for screws would have been to
secure the lid temporarily, perhaps if the coffin was
to be stored or were to be transported to the house of
the deceased, where it could then be removed to place
the body inside.
It is worth noting that the coffin in Burial 101,
which had a decorated lid and would have been relatively expensive, had at least four screws (although

Table 40. Coffin Nail Locations
Location
Burial
No.
Nail
Heads
(MNI)
Total
23
31
63
13
21
40
16
29
44
16
20
45
11
48
13
49
Corner
Joint
Head
Corner
Joint Foot
12
Drawing 1026 used
15
Drawing 1039 used
11
Drawing 1042 used
22
16
17
17
12
50
18
18
53
16
10
55
21
22
12
10
56
21
19
57
17
26
15
59
11
13
17
11
64
Top
Top
Bottom
Bottom
Horizontal Vertical Horizontal Vertical
Comments
two top horizontal nails

questionable
Drawing 1047 and photo

used
68
35
49
21
71
43
44
24
73
14
14
10
77
20
11
counted two bottom nails

at foot as corner nails
78
17
25
photo used
85
12
14
86
one nail on cranium, one

nail by right foot
90
16
photo used
94
20
28
top horizontal nails not

visible in photo
100
10
13
101
32
27

visible in photo
106
15
10
one nail on coffin floor
107
28
12
10
115
34
22
10
121
16
14
122
28
31
14
Drawings 280 and 1049

used
used cross section drawing

Table 40. Coffin Nail Locations (continued)
Location
Burial
No.
Nail
Heads
(MNI)
Total
123
30
13
127
11
128
16
10
130
20
133
13
12
134
13
24
135
21
10

visible in photo
138
24
photo used
145
26
33
14
Drawing 1055 used
18
10
146
Top
Top
Bottom
Bottom
Corner
Joint
Head
Corner
Joint Foot
Comments
one nail outside coffin

wall?
top horizontal nail not

visible in photo
147
20
20
15
one nail on coffin floor
148
19
27

visible in slide; one nail by
left radius, one nail by
distal left femur
149
17
19
151
16
27
16
159
19
17
15
216
13
15
13
217
27
14
11
218
12
221
20
one vertical nail in middle

of coffin lid, one nail by
right shoulder on coffin
floor
225
15
16
horizontal top nail visible

in photo; includes two corner-joint (head) screws
226
230
36
30
17

visible in photo
235
35
11
236
23
20
14
Drawings 348 and 1056

used
two nails near cranium on

coffin floor
one nail near cranium on

coffin floor

Location
Burial
No.
Nail
Heads
(MNI)
Total
238
24
25
239
27
12
241
21
23
18
242
14
22
10
245
38
20
254
19
10
266
40
10
16
268
11
16
282
17
16
294
16
18
295
39
27
19
299
59
39
20
306
20
23
12
310
32
18
311
312
17
314
35
26
13
315
27
16
plus one nail near left

elbow on coffin floor
324
15
plus one nail near right

ribs on coffin floor
332
29
12
nails were missing from

laboratory inventory
334
15
17
11
Drawing 712 used
335
38
17

visible in photo
336
12
340
37
47
11
13
342
22
43
24
346
28
27
14
347
17
18
10
353
55
15
26
Top
Top
Bottom
Bottom
Corner
Joint
Head
Corner
Joint Foot
Comments
Drawing 514 used
four scattered nails on coffin lid in drawing
top horizontal nails and

vertical bottom nail not
visible in slide; one nail
near left foot

visible in photo
photo used

Location
Burial
No.
Nail
Heads
(MNI)
Total
354
15
37
16
361
14
14
10
366
29
37
11
12
376
63
28
10
379
23
31
12
photo used
380
29
44
24

visible in slide
381
Top
Top
Bottom
Bottom
Corner
Joint
Head
Corner
Joint Foot
Comments
387
11
388
17
30
11

visible in photo; two nails
on coffin floor near feet
389
9
7
top horizontal nail not visible in photo; one nail outside coffin, two on coffin
floor
390
392
29
21

visible in slide; four nails
scattered on coffin floor;
seven vertical nails on lid
cross boards
397
39
41
10
20
four nails scattered on coffin lid
399
24
27
12
Drawing 874 used; top

horizontal nails oriented
outward (displaced?)
415
19
31
11
12
Drawing 891 used
419
14
20
Drawing 904 used
Key: MNI = minimum number of individuals.

Table 41. Burials with Coffin Screws
Low
Age
High
Age
17
22
2.5
4.5
Burial No.
Temporal
a
Group
Coffin
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
undetermined
Middle
unidentifiable
Sex
Number
b
of Screws
40
50
60
female
Late
hexagonal
72
undetermined
Early?
rectangle
2 plus 4 shanks
77
0.67
1.3
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
undetermined
Early?
rectangle
83
86
undetermined
Late
hexagonal
89
50
60
female
Late-Middle
hexagonal
95
12
undetermined
Late
hexagonal
97
40
50
male
Late
hexagonal
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
100
101
26
35
male
Late-Middle
hexagonal, decorated
122
18
20
female
Middle
hexagonal
135
30
40
male
Late
hexagonal
154
25
29
female
Middle
hexagonal
25
35
female
Middle
hexagonal, painted
159
173
0.25
0.75
undetermined
Late
rectangle
186
0.17
undetermined
Late
hexagonal
187
1.5
undetermined
Late
hexagonal
225
0.5
1.25
undetermined
Late
four-sided
female
Late
hexagonal
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal?
241
55
268
284
21
28
male
Middle
unidentifiable
285
20
30
female
Middle
hexagonal
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal?
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal?
female
Middle
hexagonal?
undetermined
Middle
hexagonal
male
Middle
hexagonal
286
4.4
65
0.5
8.5
300
315
30
40
321
341
346
50
70
female
Late
hexagonal
353
24
34
male
Middle
hexagonal
427
16
20
male?
Middle
hexagonal
A question mark indicates a probable assignment.

Counts are minimums: fragments were counted if a head was present, or if a shank with point was present with no
potentially corresponding head. Thirteen whole screws were recovered.
c
Burial 159 had two possible screws (no X-ray was taken prior to the items destruction on September 11, 2001).

their precise locations on the coffin are unknown),
which may have further increased the cost, and that
Burial159 held a coffin that was painted and also
had possible screws. Thus, the fancier the coffin, the
greater the likelihood the builder would use screws,
perhaps reflecting a keener sense of overall quality
of workmanship.
Coffin Decoration
Coffin furniture refers to handles, corner and edge
lace, breastplates, upholstery, and other decorative
metalwork as opposed to hardware (nails and screws)
used in constructing the box. Five coffins with decorative metalwork were found at the New York African
Burial Ground. Two of these were problematic owing
to recordation problems or disturbance. One hexagonal
coffin, in Burial252 (from the late period and located
north of the fence line), may have had a small breastplate on the lid; this item was recorded in the field but
never accessioned in the laboratory. A small iron disk
was recorded along with the possible breastplate and
was inventoried in the laboratory but not salvaged after
the collapse of the World Trade Center. One possible
tack and several nails were also recorded roughly
aligned lengthwise down the center of the coffin lid; it
is possible these attached the breastplate to the wood.
The grave contained the remains of a very young child
between 1 and 2years old. In Burial222, assigned to
the Late-Middle Group and holding an adult (probably a man) of undetermined age, excavators noted
small iron tacks that they thought represented a lid
decoration on the hexagonal coffin. The tacks were
observed in place on the pelvis and right arm of the
individual during excavation, but vandals disturbed
the human remains, apparently scattering the tacks,
and only four were recovered. They were identified
as of cast iron, manufactured using a technique first
patented in England in 1769 (see Lenik 1977).
Only three coffins with clearly decorated lids were
recorded in detail, in Burials101, 176, and 332. All
three were in mens graves assigned to the Late-Middle Group and are discussed in Chapter8. Iron tacks
formed the decorations, and as in Burial222, the tacks
appeared to be cast metal. In one case (Burial176)
the coffin also had handles. Each coffin is described
more fully below.
Tacks were also recovered in association with Burials138, 197, and 256 but do not seem to have represented decorations. A handle back plate was recovered
from Burial90, though it is considered unlikely the
coffin in this grave had handles (only one was found,

and the edge of the burial had been disturbed, raising
the possibility that the item was intrusive).
It is interesting that the New York African Burial
Ground coffin lid decorations were composed of
iron tacks, rather than the brass tacks favored by
Euroamericans. In addition to the fact that iron is
less expensive than brass, it may have been preferred
for cultural reasons. Tinning would have whitened
the tacks and made them reflective, so the possible
significance of color or other visual quality should
be considered (see Thompson 1983; Thompson and
Cornet 1981).
Burial 101: The Heart or Sankofa Symbol

Burial101 (see Chapter8) was of a man in his early
thirties whose dental modifications and dental lead
levels suggested possible African nativity but whose
strontium isotope levels pointed to possible birth in
America (Goodman etal. 2009 [Chapter6 of Skeletal
Biology of the New York African Burial Ground];
see Handler [1994] on modified teeth). The coffin
lid decoration or symbol measured approximately
45cm wide and 48cm long and was positioned over
the midsection of the body (Figure122).
The heart-shaped outline consisted of 51domed,
square-shanked iron tacks, with heads measuring
10mm in diameter. The inner decorative elements
were composed of smaller tacks, with heads approximately 6mm in diameter (Figure123). The tacks were
described as tinned or silvered, iron-headed tacks
when first exposed. All of the tacks appeared to be of
one-part construction and were of cast manufacture.
As illustrated in Chapter8, the interior portion of the
decoration may have originally formed initials and an
age or year. If so, the initials are indecipherable, but the
year 1769 is a plausible reading for a date (keeping
in mind that the lid had split longitudinally, possibly
bifurcating a 6). Alternatively, the interior design may
have formed part of a non-alphanumeric device.
Coffins with heart motifs on the lids are not uncommon in colonial period and nineteenth-century contexts. These motifs typically included initials or a name
and an age and/or year formed in tacks on the interior.
As noted, Joshua Delaplaine made one such coffin for
Samuel Hallet of New York in 1756. Samuel Hallets
estate paid over 2for his heart-decorated coffin, but
because it was made of an expensive wood (liquidambar), we do not know how much the Burial101
coffin, which was made of larch, may have cost. Nor
can we know who ordered the mans coffin, his family
Figure 122. Coffin lid in Burial 101: (a) in situ

drawing (scale is 1 inch = 2 feet); the lid
had split longitudinally as shown; (b) detail
of the motif formed from tacks on the lid
(drawings by M. Schur). See Chapter 8 for in
situ photograph.
and friends or the head of the deceaseds household;

whether an African craftsman built it; or whether the
deceaseds mourners decorated it themselves. The
heart shape may have had meanings for the mourners
that diverged from or expanded on those that Europeans would have attributed to it. The heart has been
interpreted as representing the soul, for example, in
West Central Africa (Denbow 1999), and the shape
of a heart with interior scrolls has been identified as
an Adinkra symbolSankofaassociated with
Twi-speaking Akan people of Ghana and the Ivory
Coast, as noted in Chapter8.
Burial 176: Handled Coffin with Tack-Edged Lid

Burial176 held possibly the most expensive coffin
of those excavated at the New York African Burial
Ground. It was fitted with six iron handles (the only
definitively handled coffin at the site) and, in addition, had iron tacks around the perimeter of the lid.
The handles, of the inverted bale type with ears on
each end of the back plates, were probably a matched
set, though they were not all well enough preserved
to confirm this. One that was X-rayed was decorated
with facing < > cutouts between the posts (Figures124127). The handles were placed two on each
side, one each at the head and foot.
We considered the possibility that the coffin was
cloth covered, a common embellishment by the eighteenth century. However, no textile fragments adhered
to the perimeter tacks, and it is likely they were simply

decorative.
The reverse-bale-type coffin handles were of handwrought iron. Conservators noted that the back plates
had strike marks from having been hand forged along
the outer edges (visible in the X-ray) and score marks
at the cutouts. The handles connected to the back
plates with posts, and the plates were screwed into
the coffin boards. A similar handle, with the ears
and facing cutout design, was recovered from a disturbed burial context at the St. Annes Churchyard in
Annapolis (Jones 2001:8).
Burial 332: HW
Unique at the New York African Burial Ground,
Burial332 held a coffin with a lid decorated in iron
nails forming initials and a number (Figure128).
The grave was of a man whose presumed initials
were HW and who probably died at age 38 (see
Chapter8). The coffin was hexagonal in shape. Its lid
had split lengthwise, leaving a gap down the center
and disturbing the lettering. The only artifacts in
the coffin were a pin beneath the mans skull and a
curved pin or copper ring fragment in the chest area.
Burial289, of a young child, overlay the southwest
part of Burial332. The grave-shaft outline indicates
the latter was a separate interment, although it may
have been deliberately placed above Burial332.
Figure 123. X-ray of small tacks from the Burial 101 coffin lid decoration. Detail shows three tacks that had rusted together.
The circles at the centers of the tack heads are where the tack shanks had broken off. Diameter is 6 mm. Exposure 30 sec./70K
(courtesy of the W. Montague Cobb Anthropology Laboratory, Howard University).
Coffins with initials and age at death, like those

with hearts, were not uncommon during the eighteenth
and nineteenth centuries, and Delaplaines records
tell us that one for a child was made in New York in
1756 for 14shillings.
The display of the deceaseds identity on the lid
suggests that the funeral ritual may have involved
showing the coffin, either at the home, during the
procession to the cemetery, or at the graveside.
Possible Painted Coffins

Coffins in Burials 159, 183, 213, and 313 were
thought by excavators to have possible paint residue.10 Burial159 was of a woman between 25 and
The conservation report (LaRoche 2002:44) stated that Burial63
was also thought by excavators to have possible paint, but there is
no mention of this in the field notes.
10
35years old, assigned to the Middle Group. Her

coffin was hexagonal in shape. The western portion
of the lid was well preserved but had split down
the middle lengthwise. When exposed, it appeared
to have red paint adhering to the wood, which was
photographed and sampled. Laboratory analysis (see
section entitled The Coffin Wood and Hardware
Assemblage: Condition, Treatment, and Chain Of
Custody) suggested that the Burial159 coffin may
in fact have been painted, based on the presence of
copper at the surface of the wood. It was not possible
to determine the color of the original surface treatment. Documentary sources from both New York and
Figure 124. Coffin lid in Burial 176, drawn during excavation

(drawing by B. Ludwig).
Figure 125. Reconstruction of coffin in Burial 176, top and side view, based
on field observation (reconstruction by B. Ludwig).
Figure 126. X-ray of coffin handle from Burial 176. The ear of the
back plate with two screw holes is visible at right, and the bale
handle can be seen to the left of this. One of the cutouts is visible
on the piece at the left (courtesy of John Milner Associates).
Figure 127. Composite drawing of coffin

handle based on the X-rays taken of the
handles from Burials 176 and 90. Length is 7.4
inches (drawing by C. LaRoche and R. Schultz).
Figure 128. Burial 332 coffin lid,

drawn as found during the excavation.
The oval indicates where the skull
was visible through the remnants of
the coffin wood. See Chapter 8 for a
photograph (drawing by M. Schur).
Charleston suggest that the color typically used for

coffins was black (see discussion in section entitled
Coffin Production and Provision).
The other coffins with possible paint also had
observable reddish coloration adhering to wood. None
was analyzed for pigment.11 Burial183, north of the
fence line and assigned to the Late Group, held a
child approximately a year old in a hexagonal coffin,
who had been buried with the head to the east rather
than the west. Samples of wood were taken, and the
south side board was identified as cedar, the north
as spruce. The coffin lid was recorded as having
flecks of possible paint over the entire surface and a
concentration of orange/red color on the north side.
A wood sample was taken from the hexagonal coffin
in Burial213, the grave of a woman 4555years old
and was identified as red cedar. Excavators noted
that a wood sample with possible red paint was also
taken, but no such sample was inventoried or analyzed
by laboratory staff. Burial313 held a man of 4555,
buried in a hexagonal coffin. His grave was north
of the fence line and is assigned to the Late Group.
According to the project conservators (LaRoche 2002:44), the
possible paint from Burial183 was not brought to their attention
for analysis, and it is assumed this was the case for Burials213 and
313 as well. Howard University laboratory staff likewise did not
note any wood samples that had been labeled as possibly painted or
that appeared to be painted. The sample identified as red cedar from
Burial213 was labeled as Bag1 of 2, but no second sample was ever
located. The lid sample from Burial313 was stored in the freezer and
was not recovered after the collapse of the World Trade Center.
11
A sample of the coffin lid included what excavators

thought was a possible paint stain collected from the
pelvic/femoral area; this sample was not identified
or analyzed for pigment. A sample of wood was also
taken from the coffin bottom and was identified as
eastern white pine.
The decorated coffins represent an added funeral
expense. If any of the adorned coffins were provided
by slaveholders, they might be interpreted as instances
of paternalism: valued household members (including free or enslaved servants and laborers) could be
afforded special treatment in death, above and beyond
the customary practice. But they might also speak
to the ability of kin to pressure slaveholders into
extra outlay. If, on the other hand, special coffins or
accoutrements were donated or paid for by friends
and kin of the deceased, they may reflect the special
esteem in which the deceased was held or the status or
aspirations of the mourners. In the case of Burial101,
the symbolic content of the decoration may have
been primary, whereas for Burial332, the identity of
the deceased was emphasized in the decoration. The
Burial176 coffins decorated handles suggest fashion
and expenditure and perhaps also special attention to
the act of carrying the deceased to the grave. Their
cutout decorations may simply have been a commonly available style for handles or may have been
somehow symbolic.
The Coffin Wood and Hardware

Assemblage: Condition, Treatment,
Chain of Custody
Wood
Coffin wood samples as well as samples of wood
thought to be from grave markers were frozen upon
recovery to preserve them for analysis. In addition,
there were many bags of soil from the scraping of
coffin stains, labeled as coffin wood, which often contained only slivers of wood or no wood (all wood samples are listed in AppendixE.1, Part3 of this volume).
Wood samples of all kinds were assigned consecutive
catalog number suffixes (CWA, CWB, etc.; see
Chapter1). Often, the bags indicated which part of the
coffin (lid, bottom, or sides) the sample came from, but
many samples were not so labeled. Unless two bags
were labeled identically, it was assumed that some

distinction in provenience was represented by separate
bags even when such a label was absent; therefore,
separate bags from a burial were always retained.
Analysis involved thawing of samples, preparation,
and examination under a polarized-light microscope.
The conservation report describes sample preparation
as follows:
The largest and most robust pieces within each
thawing episode were sampled first. For these
samples, conventional sampling strategies were
employed, including boiling the wood to facilitate taking samples or taking the required cuts
directly from viable wood (Hoadley 1990). This
was the method most frequently employed. The
more fragile samples and some minute samples
were infused with Primol WS-24 to facilitate
sample taking and identification.
Due to the large number of samples collected,
microscopic slides were not retained but photomicrographs of samples with clear distinguishing
features were digitized for documentation using
a digital imaging system [LaRoche 2002:43].
A total of 203frozen wood samples from 133burials was analyzed by John Milner Associates (JMA)
conservators using comparative techniques. Often,
the identifying morphological features were no longer extant or were degraded, and the wood could be
identified only to the family or genus level rather than
to species. Odor and the presence of residue were
useful in some identifications (further description of
the identification process will be found in LaRoche
[2002:42]). All of the identified wood samples are
listed in Table36.
No additional samples were analyzed by Howard
University Archaeology Team staff. All wood samples
stored in the freezer at the World Trade Center lab
were lost on September11, 2001. Most of the wood
samples stored in boxes on the laboratory shelving
(many of which consisted of scrapings from woodstained soils) were salvaged; however, these samples
were not considered likely to yield definitive identifications.
As noted (see section entitled Coffin Production
and Provision in this chapter), coffins in Burials63
and 159 were identified as possibly having remnants
of paint on the wood. Wood samples from these burials were examined microscopically, but no evidence
of organic binders was identified, and the samples
were subsequently subjected to X-ray fluorescence
to attempt to detect pigment. Procedures and results
of the X-ray fluorescence analysis are provided in

the conservation report (LaRoche 2002:4448). The
analysis was performed at the U.S. Customs Laboratory using a Jordan Valley Applied Research energy
dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectrometer, Model
EX300. Wood samples with iron and copper staining
from other burials, as well as control samples with no
evidence of metallic staining, were used for comparative analysis. In addition, soil samples were tested in
order to determine the extent to which wood-surface
discoloration might be a result of elements in the soil.
Results indicated that the wood from the coffin in
Burial159 probably had some kind of surface alteration, based on the levels of copper present (higher than
in soil samples but lower than residue from copper
artifacts). It should be noted, however, that a copperalloy straight pin was recovered adhering to the wood
where the pigment appeared to be best preserved. It
seems possible the copper levels present in the wood
sample may be distorted because of the proximity of
corroded pins.
Iron Hardware and Coffin Furniture

Coffin hardware was not among the material to receive
treatment by project conservators. The bags labeled as
coffin nails were examined by Howard University
Archaeology Team laboratory staff in 1999. Every
fragment was examined and enumerated as either
whole, head fragment, head and shank fragment, shank
fragment, or shank with point. This made a minimum
nail count possible for every context, which then could
be checked against the field drawing of in situ nails
where available.
Nails were all of iron and hand wrought. They typically were not measurable (whole nails that could be
measured are listed in the inventory). Most nails were
broken at the head and along the shaft, either while in
situ or during recovery. Very small nails were often
listed in the inventory as tacks, but these are not to
be confused with the dome-headed and tinned iron
tacks used for lid decorations.
The identification of screws was considered important because screws were more expensive than nails,
and their presence may indicate a higher overall cost
for the coffin (see discussion of coffin construction).
Some screws were identifiable upon visual inspection.
In other cases, where corrosion was too far advanced
for identification, possible screws were set aside for
X-rays. X-rays of unidentifiable items were only taken

for Burials1138. The remaining items that had been
set aside remained on separate shelving when the
laboratory was shut down in early 2000. These items
were not salvaged after the World Trade Center collapse on September11, 2001.
Coffin handles and tacks consisted of corrosion
products (rust) forming relatively amorphous masses.
They were desalinated in deionized water baths but
received no further conservation treatment. Some
of the handles and tacks were X-rayed by project
conservators working for JMA, and some additional
tacks were X-rayed by Howard University staff. Many
lumps of rust that were possible tacks, or that appeared
to be tacks but could not be quantified, were set aside
for X-rays along with the possible screws and were
lost in the World Trade Center collapse.
Handles with back plates numbered seven but were
broken into pieces in the course of removal from the
soil. Although not all of them were well enough preserved for accurate description, based on the surviving
pieces and X-rays, it appears likely that all were of the
same basic type and shape. Because the bags of nails
from Burial176 were not recovered from the World
Trade Center, it is not known whether any screws
were recovered.
Disposition
All coffin remains that survived the destruction
of the World Trade Center lab were transferred to
General Services Administration for reburial. Where
there were corresponding human skeletal remains,
the coffin wood and hardware were placed in the
new coffin along with the remains and any other
artifacts. No samples of coffin wood or hardware
were retained.
Chapter 11
Pins and Shrouding

Jean Howson with the assistance of Shannon Mahoney and Janet L. Woodruff
It is our assumption that for those interred at the New

York African Burial Ground, preparation of the body
included some form of covering, whether a winding
sheet, a shroud, or clothing. Where remnants of such
dressing have not survived, we cannot know how
the body was treated. However, it seems most likely
these cases had cloth that had been wound about the
corpse or sewn or tied shut. Owing to preservation
conditions, textile and fiber fragments recovered from
graves at the New York African Burial Ground were
only found in association with metal artifacts (pins,
buttons, coins, jewelry, and nails).
Other than coffin remains, the most common artifacts recovered from graves were copper-alloy straight
pins. These were always referred to in the field records
as shroud pins. Pins, however, may have been used
to fasten clothing (especially for women), or to fasten
a strip of cloth used to tie up the chin of the deceased.
An attempt has been made to analyze the placement
of the pins on the body to better determine whether
the presence of a winding cloth, some other type of
burial garment, or clothing is indicated. This chapter
focuses on pins; other clothing items are discussed
in Chapter12.
A Profile of the Burials with Pins

As noted in Chapter5, pins were found in almost
two-thirds of the burials in which their preservation was feasible. (We arrived at a total sample of
327burials by including 317burials with y or y,
cranium only preservation; 2burials with y, no cranium preservation that had pins; and 8 burials with
n preservation that had pins.) A total of 812pins
was recorded overall, from 213burials.1 It is likely
the actual frequency was greater, assuming that pins

were originally present in many of the extremely
disturbed burials and that some pins had decomposed
beyond recognition. In many cases, the pins could
not be recovered because of their advanced decomposition, but often, even when no actual fragment
remained, telltale green stains indicating that pins
had been present were noted and recorded (either
prior to removal of the skeleton or during cleaning
of the bone).
Tables42 and 43 provide a basic profile of the
burials with pins. We look at age, gender, and pin
use over time, then turn to the actual placement of
pins on the body.
Sex, Age, and Time

The distribution of pins was skewed along age and
gender lines. Children and infants were more likely
to have pins than adults, and women more likely than
men. It is possible that clothing is represented by some
of the pinsthey were more likely to be used with
womens clothing than mens. This will be discussed
further when we turn to pin placement.
The overall frequency of burials having at least
one pin changed little from the Middle Group on
(Table44). The lower frequency of Early Group burials with pins is attributable both to the probability
that these goods were less abundantly available in the
early eighteenth century and to reduced preservation.
Pins were very fragmentary at the time they were inventoried (see
section entitled Recovery, Condition and Treatment, and Chain of
Custody). The number 812 is the number of pins represented based
on field and laboratory recording, rather than pin fragments that were
recovered and eventually reburied, which numbered 1,232.
1
248 Jean Howson

Table 42. Presence of Pins, by Age Category and Sex
Age/Sex
Number of
Burials with Pins
Total Sample of
Age/Sex Category
Percent of Age/
a
Gender Category
Adult females
53
74
71.62
Adult males
46
94
48.94
Adult undetermined
10
17
58.82
Total adults
109
185
58.91
Infants up to 6 months
22
28
78.57
Subadults 6 months to
15 years
82
114
71.93
Total subadults
104
142
72.53
Total
213
327
65.14
Totals used to calculate percentages do not include burials for which neither age nor sex determination
can be made, burials that were completely redeposited remains, burials where empty coffins were discovered, or burials without pins that were missing the cranium, unless the pins were recovered with the
bone. We arrived at a total sample of 327 burials by including 317 burials with y or y, cranium
only preservation; 2 burials with y, no cranium preservation that had pins; and 8 burials with n
preservation that had pins.
If we look at the distribution of burials with pins by

sex and age over time, we also see little appreciable
change. Burials of women were consistently much
more likely to be associated with at least one pin than
those of men.
The numbers of pins in adult burials, rather than
their presence or absence, exhibit a different pattern,
however (Table45). In the Early and Middle Groups,
more of the pins were found with womens burials,
although in the later temporal groups, slightly more
of the pins were found with men than with women.
The preponderance of men in the Late Group burials
accounts for the distribution in that group, but the
Late-Middle burials may point to a change over time
in burial attire.
Analysis of Pin Placement

Table43 lists burials with pins in four body areas.
This information helps us to understand the function
of pins and ultimately sheds light on how the living
mourners prepared the body for burial.
Those who prepared the very youngest for burial
apparently wrapped them in cloth and then fastened
the cloth with numerous pins (Figures129 and 130).
This seems counterintuitive: complete shrouding
would have required little cloth to wrap the smallest

children and infants, so why the need for pins at all?
We hypothesize that pins had ritual meaning beyond
fastening. This meaning may have had to do with
protecting the very young or with ensuring adequate
means to make a spiritual passage. Without knowing
the precise meanings, we can point to the extra care
taken by mourners in their ministrations to the body
of an infant, pin by pin, and the social and spiritual
connection to the deceased embodied in this ritual
moment. A purely utilitarian interpretation (as shroud
fasteners) in the burials of children is inadequate. By
extension, all of the pins used in shrouding may have
had ritual meaning as well as having a functional use
as fasteners.2
Burials with pins only on the cranium include
31adults and 13subadults (excluding 2burials with
pins that had been truncated so that the cranium was
the only surviving part of the skeleton, making it
impossible to know whether pins had been present
elsewhere on the body). Burial drawings show the
In his early study of African American burials from College
Landing, Carter Hudgins (1977:71) similarly noted that the placement
of pins and location of the stains assumed a pattern that indicated
cultural significance rather than random occurrence.
2
Chapter 11 . Pins and Shrouding 249

Table 43. Burials with Pins and Pin Locations
Burial Low
No. Age
1
5
6
High
Age
Age Category
20.00 25.00
0.50
adult
Sex
adult
No
Preservation
Provenience
Code
Cranium
Jaw/
Neck
Torso
Extremities
Late
LateMiddle
12
Late
LateMiddle
undetermined Middle
female?
1.00 subadult undetermined
25.00 30.00
Location
Temporal
male?
Group
3.00
0.00
0.50
infant
35.00 45.00
adult
female
Late
0.50
infant
undetermined
Late
14
50.00 60.00
adult
female
Middle
6.00 subadult undetermined Middle
subadult undetermined Middle
12
14
16
17
0.00
4.00
19
20
45.00 50.00
22
2.50
23
25.00 35.00
4.50
adult
male
Late

adult
male
Early
24
3.00
27
1.40
30
7.00 11.00 subadult undetermined Middle
11
Middle
31
14.00 16.00
adult
32
50.00 60.00
adult
35
undetermined Middle
male
37
45.00 55.00
adult
male
Late
38
12.00 18.00
adult
female
Early
Late
39
40
5.00
50.00 60.00
adult
female
43
2.50
LateMiddle
45
2.50
46
49
40.00 50.00
adult
female?
Middle
adult
female
Middle
53
0.25
55
3.00
Middle
56
57
30.00 34.00
0.88
adult
female
250 Jean Howson

Table 43. Burials with Pins and Pin Locations (continued)
Burial
No.
Low
Age
Age
High
Age Category
58
3.50
4.50
59
0.00
0.25
60
0.25
0.75
63
35.00 45.00
Sex
subadult undetermined
infant
undetermined
adult
male
Cranium
Jaw/
Neck
Torso
Extremities
Late
Late
LateMiddle
Late
LateMiddle
No
Preservation
Provenience
Code
64
0.38
0.88
65
0.00
0.49
infant
undetermined
Late
40.00 50.00
adult
male
LateMiddle
y
(no cranium)
71 25.00 35.00
adult
female
Late
Early?
Middle
67
72
1.00
2.00
Location
Temporal
a
Group
73 20.00 30.00
adult
75
0.00
infant
undetermined Middle
16.00 19.00
adult
undetermined
78
79
0.00
0.25
0.75
81
female?
Early

adult
female
Middle
y
(no cranium)
82
18.00 25.00
adult
female
Middle
y
(cranium
only)
84
17.00 21.00
adult
female
Early
85
0.25
0.75
86
6.00
8.00
87
4.00
6.00
y
(cranium
only)
Late
89 50.00 60.00
adult
female
LateMiddle
90
adult
female
Middle
LateMiddle
Late
Late
Late
91
35.00 40.00
0.67
1.30
94
95
7.00
12.00
97
40.00 50.00
99
6.00 10.00
adult
male

Burial Low
No. Age
101
102
High
Age
Sex
Temporal
a
Group
Location
No
Preservation
Provenience
Code
Cranium
Jaw/
Neck
Torso
Extremities
LateMiddle
26.00 35.00
1.33
Age
Category
103
adult
male
104
30.00 40.00
adult
female
Middle
107
35.00 40.00
adult
female
LateMiddle
LateMiddle
108
0.25
109
0.67
1.33
LateMiddle
111
0.67
112
0.25
115
25.00 35.00
adult
female
Middle
116
45.00 55.00
adult
male
Middle
119
35.00 45.00
adult
male
LateMiddle
Early
Middle
121
122
2.50
18.00 20.00
adult
female
123
0.67
LateMiddle
126
3.50
127
0.67
128
0.00
0.17
undetermined Middle
130
1.00
131
133
134
infant
1.00
Late
40.00 50.00
136
adult
female
Late
143
6.00
144
0.00
0.17
infant
undetermined Middle
146
0.00
0.00
infant
undetermined
LateMiddle
147
55.00 65.00
adult
male
Late
148
12.00 18.00
adult
undetermined Middle
149
0.50
252 Jean Howson

Burial Low
No. Age
151
High
Age
35.00 45.00
153
Age
Category
Sex
Location
Temporal
a
Group
Cranium
Jaw/
Neck
Torso
Extremities
No
Preservation
Provenience
Code
adult
male
Late
adult
female?
Late
154
25.00 29.00
adult
female
Middle
159
25.00 35.00
adult
female
Middle
160
3.50
166
0.50
167
8.50
169
5.50
Late
Late
171
173
44.00 60.00
0.25
adult
male
Late
174
17.00 18.00
adult
male
Late
175
24.00 28.00
adult
male
Middle
176
20.00 24.00
adult
male
LateMiddle
177
30.00 60.00
adult
undetermined
Early
179
25.00 30.00
adult
male
Late
180
11.00 13.00 subadult undetermined
Late
183
0.63
Late
186
0.00
0.17
undetermined
Late
187
1.50
Late
Late
189
190
infant
adult
0.38
undetermined Middle
191
25.00 30.00
adult
male
Late
192
40.00 60.00
adult
female
Late
195
30.00 40.00
adult
female
Late
196
20.00 24.00
adult
undetermined
Late
199
30.00 40.00
adult
female
Late
Late
201
1.50
203
12.00 18.00
adult
undetermined
Late
205
18.00 20.00
adult
female
Late
210
35.00 45.00
adult
male
Late
213
45.00 55.00
adult
female
Middle
214
45.00 55.00
adult
male
Late
215
0.00
0.16
infant
undetermined Middle

Burial
No.
Low
Age
High
Age
Age Category
216
0.00
0.16
219
4.00
5.00
221 30.00 60.00

225
0.50
1.25
226
0.00
0.17
229
6.75
11.25
infant
Sex
Temporal
a
Group
Location
Cranium
Jaw/
Neck
Torso
Extremities
No
Preservation
Provenience
Code
undetermined
LateMiddle
LateMiddle
Early
Late
Early
LateMiddle
adult
male
infant
undetermined
230 55.00 65.00
adult
female
Late
235 28.00 42.00
adult
female
LateMiddle
Late
236
4.00
5.00
239
1.50
3.50
241 55.00 65.00
adult
female
Late
242 40.00 50.00
adult
female
Late
Late
244
5.00
9.00
245
2.50
4.50
252
1.00
2.00
Late
253 13.00 15.00
LateMiddle
undetermined Middle
255
0.17
infant
257 30.00 40.00
adult
male
Late
259 17.00 19.00
adult
female?
Late
265
0.00
0.50
1.00
266 25.00 35.00
adult
268
infant
0.00
0.50
281
adult
female
Late
undetermined Middle
male?
Early
283
0.33
0.67
289
5.00
9.00
LateMiddle
LateMiddle
290 45.00 55.00

294
0.50
1.00
adult
male
295 30.00 50.00
adult
female
Middle
299 40.00 50.00
adult
male
Late
254 Jean Howson

Burial Low
No. Age
High
Age
300
303
Age
Category
Sex
Temporal
a
Group
Location
No
Preservation
Provenience
Code
Cranium
Jaw/
Neck
Torso
Extremities
undetermined Middle
Late
LateMiddle
undetermined Middle
infant
0.50
1.00
305 - 0.33
0.33
311
0.25
0.75
312
0.00
0.30
infant
313 45.00 55.00
adult
male
Late
315 30.00 40.00
adult
female
Middle
316 18.00 20.00
adult
female
LateMiddle
319
adult
female
LateMiddle
infant
undetermined
320
2.00
4.00
321
1.00
2.00
325 25.00 35.00
adult
male
Late
328 40.00 50.00
adult
female
Middle
332 35.00 40.00
adult
male?
LateMiddle
Middle
334
335 25.00 35.00
336
0.50
1.00
adult
female
338 33.00 65.00
adult
female
LateMiddle
340 39.30 64.40
adult
female
Early
341
adult
male
Middle
342 25.00 35.00
adult
female?
Late
343 19.00 23.00
adult
male
Late
346 50.00 70.00
adult
female
Late
348
1.00
2.00
351 50.00 60.00
adult
male
Middle
352
adult
male
LateMiddle
353 24.00 34.00
adult
male
Middle
356
360

Burial Low
No. Age
361
High
Age
33.00 57.00
362
363
1.00
Age
Category
Sex
Location
Temporal
a
Group
Cranium
Jaw/
Neck
Torso
Extremities
No
Preservation
Provenience
Code
adult
male
Early
adult
undetermined
LateMiddle
y
(cranium
only)
Late
368
369
40.00 50.00
LateMiddle
undetermined Middle
370
373
374
2.00
male
Late
45.00 60.00
adult
female
0.25
infant
375
16.00 18.00
adult
female
Middle
376
45.00 65.00
adult
male
LateMiddle
380
40.00 60.00
adult
male
Middle
Early?
382
0.00
adult
4.00
383
14.00 18.00
adult
female
Middle
385
40.00 60.00
adult
female
Middle
388
29.00 57.00
adult
female
Early
adult
female
Early
LateMiddle
Middle
389
393
- 0.17
0.17
infant
395
43.00 53.00
adult
396
6.50
397
30.00 40.00
adult
398
25.00 35.00
adult
undetermined Middle
0.30
infant
undetermined Middle
400
25.00 35.00
adult
male
Middle
403
39.00 65.00
adult
male
Middle
399
0.00
8.50
undetermined Middle
male
female
405
6.00
406
0.00
0.50
infant
undetermined Middle
412
0.00
0.00
infant
undetermined Middle
413
50.00 70.00
adult
female
LateMiddle
414
39.00 59.00
adult
male
Middle
256 Jean Howson

415
Cranium
Jaw/
Neck
Torso
Extremities
Middle
High
Age
Age
Category
35.00 55.00
417
Location
Temporal
a
Group
Burial Low
No. Age
418
30
419
Sex
adult
55
male
No
Preservation
Provenience
Code
adult
male
Middle
48.00 62.00
adult
male
Middle
427
16.00 20.00
adult
male?
Middle
428
40.00 70.00
adult
female
Middle
adult
undetermined
Early
432
Note: Table 43 includes observations of pin evidence in each location, such as staining on bones, as well as pins recorded in the
field and those recovered and inventoried. Fragments found in soil from the same location are normally counted as a single pin.
Where records indicate a pin was recovered from a location and staining on bone from that location was subsequently noted, only
one pin should be counted.
a
Table 44. Burials with Pins by Age, Sex, and Temporal Group
Early
Sex/Age
Number
Middle
With
Percent
Pins
Number
Late-Middle
With
Percent
Pins
Number
With
Percent
Pins
Late
Number
Total
With
Percent
Pins
Number
With
Percent
Pins
Female
62.50
32
23
71.88
10
80.00
24
17
70.83
74
53
71.62
Male
10
40.00
26
14
53.85
18
50.00
40
19
47.50
94
46
48.94
Adult,
undetermined
60.00
4 66.67
50.00
50.00
17
10
58.82
Infant
1 100.00
18
14
77.78
66.67
83.33
28
22
78.57
Subadult
11
27.27
66
48
72.73
16
14
87.50
21
17
80.95
114
82
71.93
Total
35
16
42.86
148
103
69.13
49
34
69.38
95
60
63.16
327
213
65.14
Note: Number includes burials with adequate preservation to expect pins in addition to burials with n preservation from which
pins were nevertheless recovered.
Table 45. Pin Frequencies, by Temporal Period and Sex

Women
Men
Temporal
Group
Total
No. of Pins
No. of Pins
Percent
Early
29
20
68.96
31.03
Middle
109
81
74.31
28
25.69
Late-Middle
47
20
42.55
27
57.45
Late
98
41
45.28
57
54.72
No. of Pins
Percent
Figure 129. Left, in situ photograph of Burial 14. Burial

14 was of an infant no more than 6 months old who
shared a grave with a 3545-year-old woman (Burial
12). The bones of the woman can be seen in the
photograph, with the infants remains superimposed
(photograph by Dennis Seckler). Right, excavators
drawing of pin locations prior to removal. The pins
encircled the infants skull (at top) and extended down
to the knees. Scale is 1 inch = 1 foot.
Figure 130. In situ drawing

of Burial 183, which held
an infant between 8 and 16
months old. This burial was
one of just two infants that
had the head to the east
rather than the west. Pins
were found in place along
the center of the remains
from the skull (at bottom of
drawing) down the length
of the body. Scale is 1 inch =
1 foot; north is to the right
precise locations on the crania in many cases, and

the pins were typically on the top of the skull or near
the ear. The presence of pins on the cranium has been
taken to be diagnostic of shrouding in other archaeological contexts (e.g.,Hudgins 1977; Hunt 1994:92).
It is possible, however, that pins found only at the
head represent a piece of cloth used to secure the

chin rather than a complete shroud. In cases where
cranial pins are absent, chin cloths simply may have
been tied. The securing of the jaw was necessary
because it would otherwise fall open when the corpse
was laid out supine. Richardson (2000:19) records
that in traditional English practice, prior to the onset
of rigor, the eyes would be closed, then the mouth,
which would be secured either with the band of a
shroud cap or with a bandage passing under the chin
and tied at the top of the head. According to Litten
(1991:72) the chin tie was removed if a tied cap was
put on. The tying of the chin was typical in English
practice in the eighteenth century, and chin cloths
could be purchased ready-made along with a shroud
(Litten 1997:48). Any strip of cloth would have been
sufficient, however.
Tying the chin may have been a typical part of the
process of laying out the dead among both white and
black New Yorkers, but pinning the chin cloth suggests
a variant practice. If, on the other hand, cranial pins
reflect the special arrangement of the shroud so as to
expose the face, it is possible that for these deceased
individuals, the face was meant to be in view at some
point during the funeral proceedings, perhaps during
a wake.
258 Jean Howson

Table 46. Number of Burials with One or More Pins in the Four Body Areas, by Sex
Sex
Cranium
Jaw/Neck
Torso
Extremities
Female
31
10
25
Male
25
14
Note: Only adults for whom gender could be definitely determined are included.
About equal numbers of New York African Burial

Ground men (15men and 2probable men) and women
(11women and 1probable woman) had pins only on
the cranium, but the distribution by age is skewed
toward adults aged 30 or over. Childrens chin cloths
may typically have been tied rather than pinned. Tying
rather than pinning also may have been dictated by
religious observance, as in Muslim shrouding. If the
cranial pins indicate arrangement of the shroud so
as to show the face, such a practice may have been
reserved mainly for older individuals.
There were a number of burials with pins that also
had possible evidence of clothing. For example, a
child (Burial22) and two women (Burials213 and
342) had aglets (small copper-alloy tubes that cover
the ends of laces) as well as pins. In these cases, the
aglets may represent clothing (see Chapter12) or the
ties of shrouds. The locations of the aglets on the body
were not provenienced in the field because they were
indistinguishable from pins. The aglet in Burial213
was determined to be from the left parietal.
Other burials with evidence for clothing that also
had pins include one of a man with a jacket (Burial6)
and three adults with apparent knee breeches (Burials203, 259, and 415). Thirteen adults with miscellaneous buttons or button fragments that may represent
clothing also had at least one pin. There are several
possible reasons for the presence of both pins and
buttons:
Individuals were both clothed and wrapped. Four
of the people buried with both pins and buttons
(Burials325, 353, 405, and 415) had pins only at
the cranium or cranium and jaw. One, the woman
in Burial385, had a pin in the torso area as well as
two at the cranium. Only one of these had clearcut evidence for clothing, Burial415; perhaps
preparation of this mans body included securing
the jaw with a chin cloth, which was left in place
at burial.
They wore buttoned undergarments beneath their
shrouds. Bone buttons, likely to represent undergarThe New York African Burial Ground
ments were found with Burials37, 171, 257, 313,

353, and 385.
They were clothed rather than wrapped, and some
of their clothing was pinned.
Their buttons were not attached to clothing but
rather were worn on a string or placed in the hand
as a memento or talisman at the time of burial.
Some adults had pins on the head, torso, and
extremities. These cases, like those of children with
pins along the body, probably indicate winding sheets
that may have been pinned along the length of their
bodies.3
Although pin distributions by sex on cranium, jaw,
and extremities were comparable, more than twice
as many women than men had pins on the torso area
(Table46). This is consistent with the hypothesis
that in some cases pins represent clothing fasteners
rather than shrouds. Pins were used more often than
buttons to fasten womens clothing in the eighteenth
century (Figure131; see section entitled Clothing and
Fasteners in Historical Context in Chapter12). Of
the adults with pins only on the torso, 5 were women,
and 5 were men (excluding two burials with torso pins
that had been truncated, leaving only the post-cranial
skeleton and making it impossible to know whether
cranial pins had been present).
Pins and Shrouds in EighteenthCentury New York

Mass produced in the period of the African Burial
Ground cemetery, straight pins would have been
available at shops, at the markets, and no doubt from
peddlers, and they also could have been obtained by
women and girls who did the sewing in European
households. Cloth for shrouds or winding sheets may
Litten (1991:59) cited this practice for English shrouding in the
fifteenth century but did not trace its history.
3
Figure 131. Detail from Jersey Nanny (mezzotint) by

John Greenwood, American, 1748. This depiction of
a working-class woman shows two items of clothing
fastened with pins. The scarf or shawl is pinned at her
throat; her short gown, which wraps across her torso,
is pinned on the left side of her chest. (Photograph
2009 Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. John Greenwood,
American, 17271792, Jersey Nanny, 1748, Mezzotint,
Sheet: 24.4 x 19.7 cm [9 5/8 x 7 3/4 in.], Museum of Fine
Arts, Boston, Gift of Henry Lee Shattuck, 1971.715.)
have been considered, along with the coffin, a sine

qua non of proper burial. As we noted in Chapter2,
there is scant evidence, but wrapping the dead in
some manner was practiced in at least some of the
African cultures to which captives brought to New
York belonged. There is no documentary evidence
of New Yorks household heads providing cloth as
there is for coffins, though such a custom may have
developed. Alternatively, like pins, cloth would have
been available to blacks through several other means,
such as purchase at the many eighteenth-century shops
that dealt in cloth, or from peddlers who sold such
wares; recycling from the deceaseds or a relatives
household, or through appropriation that would have
come under the heading of theft.
Litten (1991:5784) has described shrouding in
fifteenth- through nineteenth-century England, relying for the most part on information gleaned from
sculptures, drawings, and paintings; Richardson
(2000:2021) draws on folklore and illustrated funeral
invitations to provide a picture of traditional practices.
The winding sheet was commonly used for burials in
post-medieval England, and the custom would have
come to New York with European colonists. In English (and more widely European) practice, a winding
sheet consisted of a rectangular length of cloth that
enclosed the corpse, tying above the head and below

the feet. The edges of the sheet, about three times
the width of the corpse and 6inches longer at both
head and foot, were fastened either by stitching or
pinning, and each end was tied with a strip of cloth.
Illustrations from the sixteenth through eighteenth
centuries show English corpses wrapped in generous
widths of material with gathered ends. In some cases,
the illustrations show that the fabric was pushed back
to reveal the deceaseds face; otherwise, the winding
sheet completely concealed the corpse. In Europe and
among European colonials, specific garments called
shrouds, as opposed to winding sheets, came into
fashion in the eighteenth century. These somewhat
resembled an open-backed nightshirt with a tie at the
feet. The shroud had a drawstring tie at the neck, rather
than above the head, and sleeves with drawstrings or
tapes at the wrists. A fabric cap complemented the
dress. Men and women seem to have been dressed for
the grave in similar, if not identical, fashion.
Blanche White, who advertised as an undertaker in
New York in 1768, sold shrouds and sheets (Gottesman 1938:142), suggesting that these were two
different items, the former probably a garment rather
than a winding sheet. There was probably no difference between the sheets used for bedding and those
260 Jean Howson

used for winding sheets, at least among the poor.
Household mistresses may have offered old bedsheets
for use as shrouds by enslaved and free servants,
whereas they might have used heirloom linens or
newly purchased sheets or garment shrouds for their
own family members.
In the North American colonies, there was no
regulation of the type of cloth used for shrouding;
linen and wool would have been most common.4
Lengths of cloth, like wood for a coffin, would have
represented no small expense for bereaved family and friends, and it was probably impossible to
provide the flowing or repeatedly wrapped shrouds
that are depicted on the well-to-do in early European
sculptures and prints. A proper Muslim shroud, too,
requires yards of cloth because more than one wrap is
used and each wrap should be large enough to cover
the entire body. The ideal is three wraps for a man
and five wraps for a woman, but one wrap can suffice because the provision of a shroud should not be
unduly burdensome.5 The outlay for a proper shroud
would have been prohibitive for African Muslims
living under slavery in colonial New York. They
would have met their collective obligation to wrap
the dead by adapting their practices to the economic
constraints they faced.
Surviving records from funeral suppliers do not
detail the colors of cloth used for shrouds or winding sheets, but in most cases, illustrations appear to
show white or pale fabrics dressing the dead (see
Litten 1991:5784). Antebellum accounts from the
American South suggest that enslaved plantation
laborers usually used white cloth to wrap their dead
(Roediger 1981:169). Muslim shrouds are always
supposed to be white. The colors of shrouds used in
the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in the areas
of Africa where New Yorks captives came from were
not recorded.
In the late seventeenth century, the English Parliament passed The

Act for Burying in Woollen, which prohibited the use of linen or other
fabrics as burial garments (in order to protect the woolen industry).
Well-to-do families sometimes flouted this law and considered the
fines imposed as one of the costs of a funeral (Litten 1991:74).
The act remained in effect until the early nineteenth century in
England.
4
During the course of the African Burial Ground project, Fatimah

Jackson, Kofi Agorsah, Muhammad Hatim, and Sylviane Diouf
provided information about Muslim burial practices. For an overview
of prescribed Muslim practices, see University of Southern California
Muslim Student Association (2007).
5
The Pin Assemblage and

Associated Cloth
Pins recovered from graves at the New York African
Burial Ground were very uniform. Almost all were
fragmentary (if not already broken in situ, they usually
broke when handled). Those that were whole or were
in pieces that could be measured were just under to just
over 1inch long. Only five whole pins were present
at the time of the Howard University inventory of the
assemblage. Examples of recovered pins are shown in
Figure132. (A photograph of the replicas of pins that
were created for the New York African Burial Ground
by artisans at Colonial Williamsburg is provided in
Chapter1; see Figure9.)
Cloth was typically recovered along with larger
metal artifacts such as buttons or coins, but was also
recovered with pins from a few of the burials. The
identified textiles are of linen and cotton. Burials with
textile remnants associated with pins or aglets (rather
than buttons or cuff links) are listed in Table47 (see
Chapter12 for textiles associated with buttons). Also
included in this table are burials that yielded textile
fragments that were associated with metal items that
would have aided preservation (e.g.,coins) but no
buttons or cuff links. The fragments listed in Table47
may represent shrouds, but some might also be from
clothing. One man, in Burial415, had clothing represented by numerous buttons but is included because
we know he also had cloth pinned on the cranium
(Figure133). Examples of textiles from possible
shrouds are shown in Figures134 and 135.
Recovery, Condition and Treatment,

Chain of Custody
During excavation, pin recovery was not always possible because of the state of decomposition of these
fragile items. When recovered in the field, the pins
or pin fragments were placed in small plastic containers or bags and brought to the project laboratory.
In the laboratory, conservators noted that pins were
mineralized and highly fragmented, often consisting
only of corrosion product. The pins were desalinated
and batch-treated with a corrosion inhibitor, vacuumimpregnated with the acryloid B-72, and stored in
polyethylene boxes. The exact location of each pin
within a burial (e.g.,cranium, vertebrae, etc.) was
either not recorded on the field containers, or this
Figure 132. Copper-alloy pins from Burial 12 (Catalog

Nos. 253-B.001 and 253-B.002). The bottom pin is 2.2
cm in length (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Table 47. Textile Fragments Recovered (Not in Association with Buttons)

Burial No.
Catalog No.
18
Type of Fragment
unidentified
possible textile
Comments
Found in soil adhering to left parietal during cleaning of

remains; not conserved.
22
344-B.004
linen
46
605-B
unidentified
Found in soil pedestal during cleaning of remains; not

conserved.
71
813-B.003
unidentified
Textile associated with pin; not listed in conservation

report.
104
847-B.003
unidentified
Not listed in conservation report.
109
852-B.002
linen
121
866-B
unidentified
136
881-B.002
linen
156
901-B
fiber, unidentified
169
926-B.001
cotton
180
960-B
fiber, unidentified
219
1200-UNC
unidentifiable
225
1211-B.004
unidentified
Not listed in conservation report.
230
1216-B.002
unidentified
Adhering to either side of a copper-alloy coin.
252
unidentified
Impression of cloth noted in field records; not recovered.
363
unidentifiable
389
2023-B.002
unidentifiable
415
2097-B
unidentified
Plain weave, partially mineralized; single aglet recovered.
Pseudomorph (exact replica of textile formed by corrosion

products).
conserved.
conserved.
Provenience unclear.
Single fiber from cranium.

Recovered with pin during cleaning of cranium in laboratory; not conserved.
262 Jean Howson
Figure 133. Pin with fabric from Burial 415 (Catalog No. 2097-B). This burial
held a man buried in clothing and with this pin and cloth on the cranium.
Recovered during laboratory cleaning of the skeletal remains. The ruler is
measured in 0.5 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 134. Unidentified woven textile from Burial 104 (Catalog No. 847B.003). Length is 5 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 135. Textile from a possible shroud that had adhered to a coin
from Burial 230 (Catalog No. 1216-B.002). The coin is 22 mm in diameter
(photograph by Jon Abbott).
information was not retained after laboratory staff

reboxed the items.
These pins were inventoried and a few examples
photographed by laboratory personnel. They were
reexamined by Howard University Archaeology Team
personnel during laboratory analysis in 19981999
and in 2001, and all fragments were counted (head
and shank, shank, or shank with point). Final, highquality photographs of representative pins were taken
by Jon Abbott in August 2001. At that time, the pins
were packed by the Bronx Council of the Arts and
shipped by Artex to its art storage facility in Landover,

Maryland, pending preparation for reburial. The pins
were reinventoried by the Army Corps of Engineers
at Artex in 2003 and subsequently transshipped back
to New York, where they were placed in coffins for
reburial.
In many cases, pins were within soil pedestals
adhering to skeletal remains when they were removed
from the ground. When such pins were recovered during the cleaning of the bones at the Howard University
Cobb Laboratory, they were placed in polyethylene

bags and labeled according to the skeletal element they
were associated with. These pins were not treated by
conservators. They were retained at the Cobb Laboratory and shipped to the New York laboratory in 2003,
where they were inventoried by Howard University
Archaeology Team staff. In September 2003 they
and placed in coffins for reburial.
The low rate of textile survival is a result of the
soil conditions at the site. Textile and fiber fragments
were recovered in association with some pins during
field excavation, preserved by copper salts associated
with the degradation of the copper alloy. Only the
more robust fibers and textile fragments were cleaned
in the laboratory. Of the possible shroud fragments,
three were identified as linen and one as cotton. In
some cases, pseudomorphs (corrosion products that
permeated the fibers and replaced them, creating
an exact replica) of cloth were recovered. Pseudomorphs from Burials121 and 135 were examined
and photographed microscopically. Another possible
pseudomorph from Burial186 was investigated with
scanning electron microscopy, which indicated mineralized wood but was inconclusive as to the presence
of textile or fiber.
In two cases, fibers brought to the laboratory were
identified as rodent hairs (these are not included in
the list above).
Methodology
inventory as head and shank, shank, or shank with

point. This allowed for counting minimum numbers
of pins for each burial in cases where they were not
noted in the field or shown on field drawings. Pins
were counted as follows: all pins recorded in situ were
counted for the analysis of pin placement. Where field
recording was not precise or pins were recovered during laboratory cleaning, an inventoried pin fragment
was counted as one pin only if it included the pinhead,
or was the only fragment from a burial location, or had
the point and no fragment with a head present.
Pin placement within a burial was recorded in
the database where possible. This information was
obtained from field records and drawings or, in the
case of pins from pedestalled remains, from the skeletal laboratory staff, who were careful to label pins
according to skeletal element.
Manufacture and Dating

The pins found at the New York African Burial Ground
were copper alloy and drawn with wire-wrapped
heads; on some, a tinned surface was visible. These
were typical manufactures of the African Burial
Ground period. Wrapped-head pins were common
by the beginning of the seventeenth century and were
produced until the early nineteenth century (Nol
Hume 1969:254). The pins, therefore, do not provide
specific dating for burials.
Pins were examined visually, some under magnification. Pin fragments were recorded in the artifact
Chapter 12
Buttons and Fasteners

Leonard G. Bianchi and Barbara A. Bianco with the assistance of Shannon Mahoney
This chapter discusses the evidence for clothing supplied by the buttons, cuff links, and aglets associated
with the deceased. It begins with an overview of the
burials from which these items were recovered. It then
focuses on what black New Yorkers wore during the
eighteenth century and how clothing and buttons were
acquired. The assemblage is then described. Information is provided about recovery, condition and treatment, chain of custody, and findings about manufacture,
origin, and age. A synopsis of the material and stylistic
range of the assemblage is provided in the typology. The
inventory is organized by individual burial, a format
that best conveys how the fasteners were used.
Burials with Buttons, Cuff Links,

and Aglets
The preservation environment at the New York African
Burial Ground favored durable items, and cloth and
clothing did not survive except in tiny fragments that
adhered to metal objects. Only a handful of textile
fragments were recovered (see section entitled The
Button, Cuff Link, and Aglet Assemblage and Associated Cloth). More conspicuous were the fasteners
clothing left behind. These included buttons, cuff
links, and aglets, tiny tubes that encased the ends of
lacings and cords typically used on caps, shirts, and
gowns. One possible grommet was also recovered.
Clothing fasteners made from metal, bone, and
wood were found in direct association with 33individuals, about 8.8percent of the burials in the archaeologically excavated portion of the cemetery.1 Another
The total used here of 376burials includes those for which, at a
minimum, the presence/absence of a coffin and in situ skeletal remains
could be clearly determined; the most highly disturbed burials are
not counted.
1
nine individuals had tenuous connections with clothing fasteners. The characteristics of the burials are
summarized in Table48. Cases with problematic
proveniences are noted in the table.
The burials listed in Table48 do not provide
an even-handed guide to eighteenth-century street
clothesthree quarters of the entries pertain to men.
Nor does the table provide an even-handed guide
to the clothes people were interred in. Drawstrings,
tapes, and ties fastened eighteenth-century street
clothes in black New York, but shirts, trousers, and
gowns with fabric fasteners are not represented in
the archaeological record at the New York African
Burial Ground. Straight pins also fastened street clothing, particularly womens wear. Women, as noted in
Chapter11, had a higher frequency than men of pins
in the torso area of the body, a difference that may
hint of bodices beneath, or in lieu of, winding sheets
and shrouds. In addition, some of the buttons and
cuff links were recovered from contexts that point
to nonclothing use.
Aglets were the least visible of the clothing fasteners recovered from the individuals interred in the
burial ground. Small in size and few in number, aglets
were also the least informative about burial attire.
Only three aglets were recovered, one from a young
child (Burial22, a Middle Group interment) and
two others from adult women (Burials213 and 342,
Middle and Late Group interments, respectively). The
aglets from Burials22 and 342 were not provenienced
in the field. The aglet from Burial213 was located
on the left parietal (the cranium) and a few strands of
hair had adhered to it. Whether the aglet enclosed the
end of a lace on a womans cap is unclear.
Unlike aglets, buttons were numerous, stylistically
varied, and although associated almost exclusively
with men, provided considerable detail about the types
of attire in which the dead were laid out.
266 Leonard G. Bianchi and Barbara A. Bianco

Table 48. Burials with Buttons, Cuff Links, and Aglets
Burial
No.
Age
(years)
Sex
2530
male?
Late
10
4045
male
LateMiddle
22
2.54.5 undetermined Middle
37
4555
male
Temporal
a
Group
Items
Location in Grave
8 buttons (5 whole copper 4 copper alloy along torso, 1 at sacrum;

alloy, 2 with anchor motif; pewter at sacrum
portions of 3 pewter)
13 copper-alloy buttons
(8 whole, 5 shanks only)
Late
7 on torso, 1 on right foot; shanks at lower

right leg
aglet
not recorded
1 bone button
at left wrist
158
2030
male
Late
171
4460
male
Late
2 bone buttons; 1 copperalloy button ring
174
1718
male
Late
2 pewter buttons
181
2023
male
Late
191
2530
male
Late
194
3040
male
Late
203
1218 undetermined
Late
211
adult
male?
Late
1 enamel cuff link face
213
4555
female
Middle
aglet
214
4555
male
Late
1 copper-alloy button;
fragments from 3 shanks;
1 wood button
copper-alloy button near right shoulder;

2 shanks in pelvic area; shank and wood
button in soil near head
238
4050
male
LateMiddle
1 bone button, 2 pairs c

octagonal-shaped copperalloy cuff links
button at cervical vertebrae; cuff links at

each wrist
250
adult
undetermined
Early
1 copper-alloy button
257
3040
male
Late
3 bone buttons
259
1719
female?
Late
313
4555
male
Late
3 bone buttons; 1 possible

copper-alloy button ring
coffin floor beneath top of the head; possible button ring from among left ribs
325
2535
male
Late
1 gilt copper-alloy button
left upper sacrum
326
4555
male
Middle 4 copper-alloy domed buttons in pelvic area and between tops of the femurs, near the hands
333
4555
male
LateMiddle
6 bone buttons
341
adult
male
Middle
1 pair c octagonal-shaped
copper-alloy cuff links
2 pairs gilt copper-alloy cuff at wrists

links, circular shape
bone buttons at right scapula and right femur; button ring at sternum
lumbar vertebrae and right innominate
7 buttons (3 copper-alloy; 6 on pelvic area, 1 found during skeletal

4 copper-alloy-and-bone with cleaning; location of cuff links unknown
impressed design); cuff links
(missing from lab)
left ilium
1 copper-alloy button shank near right femur

8 wood-and-copper-alloy but- at the knees, wrists, and pelvic area
tons; possible leather covers
on the right clavicle, adjacent to the chin
left parietal
possibly near pelvis

1 button from left acetabulum; 2 found
during screening of soil
18 buttons (11 copper alloy, 4 copper alloy at each knee, 3 in pelvic

2 wood, and 5 shanks)
area; 2 wood at ribs; 5 shanks on vertebrae
and pelvis
pelvis
left radius
Chapter 12 . Buttons and Fasteners 267

Table 48. Burials with Buttons, Cuff Links, and Aglets (continued)
Burial
Age
No.
(years)
Sex
Temporal
a
Group
Items
Location in Grave
not recorded
342
2535
female?
Late
aglet
353
2434
male
Middle
1 bone button
361
3357
male
Early
1 pewter button
(missing from laboratory)
366
3462 undetermined Middle
368 10.513.5 undetermined Middle

379
3040
male
Middle
385
4060
female
Middle
male
LateMiddle
392 42.552.5
405
610
415
3555
undetermined Middle
Male
Middle
next to left sciatic notch

above right scapula/humerus
at right wrist
1 possible grommet, copper at throat

alloy
1 copper-alloy domed button, pelvic area (innominate and left ulna)
1 possible leather button
2 bone buttons
right rib area
11 bone-backed buttons; 4 buttons at right knee, 3 at left knee, 3 ad2 octagonal cuff-link faces jacent to right hand, 1 adjacent to left hand;
1 cuff link at right clavicle, 1 at cervical
vertebrae
1 white metal button
below right wrist on pelvis
13 copper-alloy domed
4 at each knee, 2 at each upper femur, 2 at
buttons (14 recorded in field) sacrum
Burials with Artifacts with Problematic Provenience

32
5060
male?
Middle
1 pewter button fragment
243
4050
male
Late
271
4557
male
276
2024
female
Late
above right rib area in soil that was likely

redeposited (no coffin)
278
4555
male
Late
unclear, probably from soil matrix in fill

(no coffin)
371
2535
female
Middle
387
3444
male
Early
398
2535 undetermined Middle?
1 octagonal cuff link face
403
3965
in disturbed deposit; association with burial
(1 domed, 1 flat); 2 pewter unclear
buttons
male
unknown; button not recorded in field

records
beneath the skull, in redeposited soil (no
coffin)
Middle 2 copper-alloy domed buttons found on the screen
Middle
1 metal button; 2 turquoise button appears to be intrusive to the burial;

enamel cuff-link faces
cuff-link faces beneath left humerus
cuff link or button fragment provenience unknown
in disturbed deposit; association with burial
unclear
A question mark indicates that the assignment is probable.

Burials for which artifact provenience is problematic are listed at the bottom of this table. Because the association
between the burials and the artifacts is not clear, they have been excluded from the counts presented in the chapter.
c
A pair of cuff linkstwo faces (or crowns) linked togetherfasten a sleeve. One cuff link (a single face) is insufficient. A properly fastened shirt would have needed a set of cuff linkstwo matched pairs, one pair per sleeve.
b

Ten individuals appear to have been interred in
pants or breeches that buttoned at the hips or at the
hips and the knees (Burials10, 181, 203, 259, 325,
326, 379, 392, 415, and possibly 174). With the exception of the young people in Burials203 and 259, the
wearers of pants and breeches were men. Burials203
and 259 were Late Group interments. The former held
a 1218-year old of undetermined sex, and the latter
held a 1719-year old identified as a probable woman.
Because the degree of confidence in the identification
was not the highest, it is conceivable that Burial259
held a slender young man clad in knee breeches. But
the idea of a young African woman remaking herself
by manipulating everyday dress is not far fetched (for
examples of enslaved Africans in colonial Boston and
New York suspected by their owners of intending to
pass for the opposite sex, see Greene [1944:141] and
White [1991:126]; for a white New York woman who
sought to obtain work on a privateer by dressing as a
man, see Foote [2004:202]).
Two men probably wore jackets, as indicated by
buttons in the torso area of the body. The jacket buttons from Burial10 (Late-Middle Group) formed a
seven-member set of matched, polished faces. The
jacket buttons from Burial6 (Late Group) also made
a striking display: the set included one polished and
four gilt faces in different sizes bearing a range of
impressed designs, including upright foul anchors
(see Button Type6, discussed in section entitled The
Button, Cuff Link, and Aglet Assemblage and Associated Cloth).
Cuff linkstwo buttons linked togetherfastened
shirtsleeves during the era when the burial ground was
in use. Cuff links were found with six individuals, but
only in three cases were the cuff links positioned near
the wearers wrists. The men in Burials238 (LateMiddle Group) and 158 (Late Group) each had a set of
cuff links. Just one pair was recovered from the man
in Burial341 (Middle Group), although its location
at the wrist also suggests a shirt was worn. It is possible a second pair was not preserved or that the man
had only one pair when interred. The two turquoise
enamel cuff-link faces associated with the woman in
Burial371 (Middle Group) might not to have been
used to fasten a garment. They were located beneath
her left upper arm. The probable man in Burial211
(Late Group) had a turquoise enamel cuff-link face on
the right clavicle, immediately adjacent to the chin.
The man in Burial392 (Late-Middle Group) also had
a cuff link face on the right clavicle; a possible mate
was recovered in the lab when the cervical vertebrae
were cleaned. Whether the cuff links from Burials211

and 392 fastened a shirt with, say, a generous front
overlap or a center front is unclear.
Eighteenth-century shirtsleeves were also fastened
with buttons, as were shirtfronts and shirt necks. Buttons recovered from the ribs of the probable woman in
Burial259 suggest her knee breeches were topped with
a shirt. Two bone buttons and a possible button ring
were recovered near the scapula and sternum of the
man in Burial171 (Late Group). This man may have
been interred in a shirt that fastened at the neck.
The bone buttons from Burial171 may have been
covered with fabric or thread, as suggested by the lack
of staining associated with a metal cap. This kind of
button sometimes fastened eighteenth-century undergarments (see discussion in section entitled Clothing
and Fasteners in Historical Context), particularly
when its size was relatively small. In addition to
Burial171, bone buttons that may have had fabric
or thread covers were associated with seven other
interments. Some of these buttons were located in
areas that hint of underdrawers (the left sciatic notch
of the man in Middle Group Burial353, the pelvis of
the man in Late-Middle Group Burial333, and the left
acetabulum, or hip joint, of the man in Late Group
Burial257). Other examples were located in areas
that hint at a gown (the ribs of the woman in Middle
Group Burial385) and shirts (the cervical vertebrae of
the man in Late-Middle Group Burial238 and the left
wrist of the man in Late Group Burial37). Whether
shirts that fastened with covered buttons were street
clothes or undergarments in the eyes of their wearers
or in the eyes of the mourners who prepared shirt
wearers for burial, is not known. The three bone buttons with the man in Burial313 (Late Group) were
located on the coffin floor beneath the top of the head.
Their use as clothing fasteners is doubtful. They might
have decorated a hat or been part of a hairstyle (for
hat and hair decorations, see Chapter13).
Some of the buttons (Burials6, 10, 181, 259, 325,
326, and 415) and cuff links (Burials158, 238, 341,
and 392) would have ornamented as well as fastened
clothing. The items were either decorated with gilt or
impressed designs or were arrayed in eye-catching
ways. Seven of the 10individuals interred with what
we consider decorative buttons and cuff links were
from the Late-Middle and Late Groups. These men
were apparently part of a broader trend. As shown in
Table49, the proportion of men with durable clothing
fasteners increased with each successive temporal
group.

Table 49. Burials of Men with Buttons or Cuff Links, by Temporal Group Assignment
Temporal Group
Total Men
Men with Clothing Items
Number
Percent
Early
10
10.0
Middle
27
18.5
Late-Middle
19
21.0
Late
39
13
33.3
Total includes male and probable male burials with likely preservation (y or y, no
cranium).
b
Burials in which clothing items were not clearly associated with an individuals skeletal
remains are not included (see Table 48).
Although the small size of the sample exaggerates

the rise of male burial attire with durable fasteners,
the rise itself, even if less robust than it appears, is
not especially remarkable from an economic view.
As we explain in the section entitled Clothing and
Fasteners in Historical Context, the availability of
consumer goods like clothing, buttons, and cuff links
increased rapidly after the mid-1700s.
Still, the proportion of Late Group men with buttons
and cuff links is striking because some of these items
clearly fastened street clothing rather than undergarments or shrouds. It is impossible to determine precisely how many men were interred in street clothes.
The quandary derives, in part, from the difficulty of
differentiating outerwear from undergarments on
the basis of button cover and button size. But it also
derives from the multiple lives buttons led. For example, some buttons in Late Group burials of men may
have been accessories rather than fasteners, such as
the buttons beneath the head of the man in Burial313.
Other possible accessories include the bone buttons
and button ring found at the scapula and sternum of
Burial171, which might have been worn on a string
necklace, and the bone button at the left wrist of the
man in Burial37, which might have been part of a
bracelet.
Even if we had a more precise sense of where to
draw the line between undergarments and outer garments, we have no way of knowing whether street
clothes constituted the deceaseds best outfit or simply
the garments he had on when he died. Men who were
buried in the clothes they had on when they died may
not have had a circle of kin and neighbors who could
supply a shroud or a winding sheet. Street clothes may
therefore represent makeshift burial attirea practical
response of community members to the circumstances
of death rather than to the economic wherewithal of

the deceased per se. Data on coffinless burials lend
support to the idea of street clothes as the burial attire
of unusual circumstances. Evidence for clothing was
slightly more frequent in burials of men without coffins (see Chapter10). Coffinless burials were prominent in the Late Group, when the Revolutionary War
and its aftermath disrupted the city.
Some of the buttons recovered in association with
skeletal remains may have been talismans or mementos rather than fasteners or jewelry. The likeliest candidate is the copper-alloy button from Early Group
Burial250. It was recovered near the pelvis, in conjunction with a small iron mass and a large glass
bead.
Clothing and Fasteners in

Historical Context
The clearest view of how Africans in eighteenthcentury Manhattan dressed comes from the New-York
Gazette and the rival weeklies that issued from the
citys print shops. Government printer William Bradford established the Gazette in 1725. Within the next
two decades three of his former apprentices, John
Peter Zenger, Henry DeForeest, and James Parker,
started publications of their own (Hildeburn 1895).
Their newspapers, and those that followed, brokered
New Yorks commercial world. They carried shipping
news, business correspondence, notices of public auctions and private sales, lists of imported and domestic
goods, and, as the century progressed, an expanding
roster of appeals for the capture of workers who fled
from bondage. A command of insider knowledge
about the lives of unfree laborers was a key feature

of the appeals (White 1991:116120). In addition to
clothing and adornment, writers described linguistic
proficiency and workplace skills, elemental signs of
status manipulated by runaways, confidence men,
and ambitious members of the public at large (Waldstreicher 1999).
An endless procession of tow cloth shirts and
trousers, buckskin breeches, and beaver hats made
its way through Manhattans world of print (Hodges
and Brown 1994:xxxii). Waistcoats and jackets were
also part of African mens attire. African women
typically wore a petticoat (a skirt) and a short gown,
an overblouse to present-day eyes. Figures136138
illustrate the construction and silhouette of these loosefitting staple garments, which also clothed workers of
European descent.
Although utilitarian garments changed relatively
little during the eighteenth century, they varied in
texture and color, particularly in urban areas like New
York. Descriptions of clothing in advertisements for
the return of Africans who escaped from Manhattan
households (Table50) indicate that breeches were cut
from a range of durable fabrics. The coarse, Germanmade osnaburg linen so ubiquitous in the plantation
colonies (Earle 1894:175) outfitted Andrew and York,
breeches-wearing New Yorkers who fled from bondage in 1733 and 1749. Breeches were also made from
firmly woven worsteds and long-napped shags, sturdy
woolen fabrics available in blue, green, red, scarlet,
and yellow, along with somber brown and black. The
old, red quilted petticoat that Fanny wore in 1758 may
have been kin to the one pictured in Figure138; Sal
wore a blue version in 1766. The petticoat Suck wore
in 1761 was black on one side and light colored on
the other. Petticoats and short gowns were striped in
blue, red, purple, black, and green.
Domestic and imported linen mingled with woolens
and cottons produced overseas. Solids and stripes
abutted checks and prints. When Hector escaped in
1750 he wore a coarse linen shirt and trousers with a
twilled-woolen Kersey pea jacket lined in red. Pompey
fled from bondage in 1763 dressed in a checked shirt
and striped trousers. Pleasant absconded in 1781 wearing a brown short gown lined in white and a petticoat
cut from red moreen, a worsted cotton or wool with
a wavy or watery surface. A flowered red-and-green
flannel petticoat and a blue, cloth jacket outfitted an
unnamed 1415-year-old girl in 1780.
Familiarity with the clothing Africans wore was
not difficult to come by. Europeans and Africans
typically lived under the same roof and often worked
alongside one another in homes, shops, warehouses,

and industrial yards (Foote 2004:7275). And although
there is a fragmentary quality to the evidence from
newspaper advertisements, in general, black New
Yorkers had meager, long-suffering wardrobes, as did
working people everywhere (Kidwell and Christman
1974:1921). A comparison of three women highlights
some of the gaps. Jenney (see Table50) may have layered her clothing for warmth after deserting the home
of carpenter John Bell in December 1737. She owned
two petticoats and two waistcoats, jacket bodices that
closed at the front with laces, pins, or buttons (on the
construction of womens waistcoats, see Baumgarten
[2002:120]). Hannah, prosecuted in 1716 for stealing
a silk muslin handkerchief, a bit of calico, and enough
Bristol stuff to make a petticoat and a gown, testified
that her mistress had not provided her with anything to
wear (Goodfriend 1992:122). In contrast, the African
woman that George Clarke purchased in 1723 did
not want for clothes, nor did she want for a new pair
of stockings and shoes. Contention centered on the
provision of two blankets, which Clarkes secretary
had been obliged to supply after the seller had refused
(McKee 1935:121122).
Cloth and clothing were vexed issues for many,
perhaps all, colonial Americans. Not only was fabric one of the most expensive consumer goods, it
crisscrossed social boundaries the rich and the wellborn found it increasingly difficult to control (Breen
2004:148192). Domestic cloth production varied
regionally in response to shifting agrarian regimes
and nonimportation movements (Ulrich 1998:67;
White and White 1995a:165168). Yet the output of
home spinners never kept pace with the demands of
a growing, fashion-minded population; neither did
the output of shop-based swinglers (flax cleaners)
and weavers like those Obadiah Wells hired for his
spinning factory on Mulberry Street, near the Fresh
Water Pond (New-York Gazette, or, the Weekly PostBoy, May8, 1766, and December31, 1767; NewYork Gazette and the Weekly Mercury, May4, 1772).
Finished cloth was the preeminent import during the
eighteenth century (Figure139).2 It accounted for
over one-third to one-half of the annual expenditure
on manufactured goods imported from Great Britain
(Breen 2004:62; Shammas 1982:267). A mid-century
surge in lower-priced textiles brought a wide variety
of imported fabrics into the hands of ordinary people
Cloth and clothing also dominated British trade with western Africa,
as noted in Chapter13.
2
Figure 136. Mens everyday breeches with fall fronts over the center
fly. From left to right: linen cotton (17651785), cotton velvet
(17851825), and yellow nankeen cotton (17851815). Colonial
Williamsburg Collection (The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation).
Figure 137. Working womans striped linen wool petticoat (17701820)

topped by a high-waisted short gown made from cotton linen (18001820).
Colonial Williamsburg Collection (The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation).
Figure 138. Quilted petticoat (17701775) made in New York by

Margaret Bleeker Ten Eyck. Colonial Williamsburg Collection (The
Colonial Williamsburg Foundation).

Table 50. Clothing Worn by Enslaved Persons Who Escaped from New York City Households as Described
in Newspaper Advertisements, by Date
First Name Surname
Sarah
Andrew
Advertisement
Date
November 14,
1732
Saxon
Age
Clothing
man
Johnsey
August 26, 1734
25
Jenney
December 19,
1737
1415
male linen osnaburg breeches, old coat, shirts

w/cross on left breast
male homespun jacket, pair of trowsers,
speckled shirt
female birds-eyed waistcoat, darkish pettycoat,
callico waistcoat w/lg. Red flower and
broad stripe
January 14, 1740 about 25 male cargey coat and jacket, pair yellow leather
britches, good shoes and stockings
Galloway
October 27, 1740
21
Andrew
June 22, 1747
man
Wan
June 6, 1748
about 25 male white pea jacket lined w/blue, osnaburg

shirt, sailors trousers, a pretty old hat and
shoes
York
May 29, 1749
about 17 male blue and white streaked woolen jacket,

coarse osnaburg shirt, old hat, coarse
osnaburg breeches
Bolton
male dark grey homespun jacket, lined; linen

breeches; new shoes
male blue cloth waistcoat, green breeches
September 4, 1749 about 30 male very ordinary
Simon
November 21,
1748
Sam
man
male blue cloth great coat
October 16, 1749 about 27 male homespun coat, short trousers
Phoebe
August 13, 1750 about 45 female uncertain
Hector
October 8, 1750
Crook
June 8, 1752
Lewis
Francois
November 5, 1753
man
male light colored Kersey pea jacket lined

w/red, osnaburg shirt, trousers, shoes,
stockings
about 22 male brown homespun jacket, homespun shirt,

blue flowered handkerchief on head, no
hat, barefoot
man
male white linen shirt, brown yarn stockings, lt. large sq. brass
brown cloth breeches w/silk kneebands,
shoe buckles,
yellow cloth jacket w/gilt buttons
gilt jacket
buttons
Jeremy
March 3, 1755
about 21 male 2 blue coats, turnd up with red, silver

laced hat, sundry other clothes
Anthony
March 3, 1755
about 18 male darkish bearskin coat, Lt. Cloth jacket,

breeches, blue jacket, red breeches, castor
hat, sundry other clothes
Holliday
Other
Adornment
about 24 female callico suit, striped satteen silk waistcoat,

2 homespun waistcoats, petticoat
October 1, 1733
Jupiter
Sex
October 27, 1755 about 25 male homespun Kersey jacket, felt hat, shoes
and stockings
brass buttons

in Newspaper Advertisements, by Date (continued)
Advertisement
Date
Age
Sex
Venture
January 12, 1756
boy
male blue watch-coat, pair of buckskin breeches,

striped waistcoat w/metal buttons, very
dirty old homespun shirt, mixed hose, shoes
w/ large buckles
Pompey
May 31, 1756
Titus
July 26, 1756
2930
Duke
August 30, 1756
man
male speckled shirt and trousers
Reick
May 9, 1757
man
male leather breeches, striped woolen trousers

and shirt, yellowish vest, old shoes, no hat
Charles
May 30, 1757
Claus
July 4, 1757
Rose
November 21,
1757
3536
female striped homespun joseph, old red cloth

petticoat, white yarn stockings, old shoes
Hanibal
January 2, 1758
young
male brown short jacket w/hooks and eyes,

black and white striped homespun doublebreasted jacket, leather breeches, old wig
and hat
Jasper
May 8, 1758
man
male brown forest cloth coat, blue waistcoat,

leather breeches, all w/flat pewter buttons,
old hat, broken yarn stockings, old shoes
Fanny
July 3, 1758
Ohnech
July 24, 1758
28
York
July 24, 1758
man
First Name Surname
Frank
Francosis
September 13,
1758
Clothing
Other
Adornment
about 14 male blue sailors jacket, striped homespun

jacket underneath, old brown cloth breeches,
old hat and cap
male olive jacket, black breeches, white stockings, half-worn pumps
about 23 male osnaburg shirt and trousers, blue jacket

without sleeves, castor hat, blue cloth coat,
red vest, everlag breeches, several shirts
about 35 male light col. Silk camblet coat, lined w/shal- big brass shoe
loon, flowered stuff waistcoat lined w/
buckles, brass
same, wash-leather breeches almost white knee buckles
w/washing, light col. Worsted stockings,
pr. Homespun blue woolen stockings, 2 pr.
Shoes, Garlix shirt, more
woman female small black silk hat, lg. Cross barred blue
and white striped stuff gown, old red
quilted petticoat, bundle of other things
female homespun stole, petticoat, blue short
cloak, white cap
male old shoes, blue, red worsted plush breeches,
old trousers, check shirt, blue jacket, small
cropt hat w/yellow worsted ringing around
carved shoe
buckles
about 40 male a short blue sailors jacket, and trowsers,

a checked shirt and old hat
Jack
January 29, 1759
man
male brown Pea-jacket, a blue under one, a pair

of buck-skin breeches
Fanny and
child
October 1, 1759
Harry
December 31,
1759
man
male old green jacket and a white one under it, iron collar
a cap and woolen ribbed stockings
around his neck
(not visible
without exam)
Pompey
February 18, 1760
man
male white coat, ozenbrigs shirt, cloth trowsers
(child) female red and white striped Cotton Gown, a

8 months
striped blue and white Petticoat , and a cap
without any border

First Name Surname
Advertisement
Date
Glasgow
March 17, 1760
Tom
June 30, 1760
Age
Sex
Clothing
about 18 male blue great coat, plain white swan-skin

jacket, pair of trowsers, pair of Lt. Blue
stockings joined in the middle, new pair of
shoes
14 or 15
male osnabrigs shirt and trousers, deep blue

broad cloth jacket, the fore-parts lined in
two colors.
Suck
February 26, 1761 about 20 female homespun short gown with different
colored stripes, a blue and white
handkerchief, a quilted petticoat, one side
light coloured the other side Black,
Prince
February 26, 1761
man
male Brown bearskin pea jacket double breasted

lapel, lined with light coloured cloth, a
short double breasted red waistcoat brass
buttons, a pair of cloth
Lens
June 18, 1761
17
female homespun Josey and pettycoat, no shoes

or stockings
Windsor
July 23, 1761
about 23 male brown frock livery coat with yellow

collar, white shirt, waistcoat, black shag
breeches, speckled stockings, new shoes,
gold lacd hat; new beaver hat
April 29, 1762
28 or 30
Charles
Roberts
Other
Adornment
male 2 or 3 coats or suits, dark brown cloth

waistcoat with
coat (worn) dove colored cloth or fine
silver cord
frize, light blue-gray summercoat of grgam,
camblet, . . . (other)
August 19, 1762 about 30 male light colored cloth pair of breeches, jacket wears rings in
with flash sleeves, long striped trowseres, his ears
check shirt w/ chitterstrings
Tom
August 26, 1762
man
male Lt. Brown sagathee coat, crimson

waistcoat, breeches, Lt gray stockings,
white shirt, felt hat, stockings
Jack
September 9, 1762
man
male blew surtout coat w/yellow buttons, black

knit breeches, black stockings, check shirt
Jack
September 23,
1762
13 or 14
male white shirt, black stocking breeches, white

waistcoat, Lt. Brown stuff waistcoat w/dirty
silver cord, no sleeves, black stocking
waistcoat, black castor hat, no shoes or
stockings.
Pero
September 30,
1762
19
Salvavus
male white jacket, stripd trowsers, a hat, but

no shoes
October 14, 1762 about 22 male Lt. Blue double breasted jacket, lined
white flannel, Lt. Colourd breeches,
oznabrig shirt
Joe
December 23,
1762
24
male brown coat with red lining, red double

breasted vest, thicksett breeches, felt hat
Siro
January 7, 1763
man
male brown coat, green jacket. Leather breeches,

blue stockings, shoes but on the top and
sewd up again
Lucretia
March 5, 1763
woman female black petticoat, white apron, speckled

handkerchief, blue waistcoat, laced cap,
blue shot cloak
had bobs in
his ears

First Name Surname
Advertisement
Date
Age
Sex
July 28, 1763
man
male oznaburgh jersey, petticoat
July 28, 1763
man
male oznaburgh frocks, trowsers
July 28, 1763
Clothing
August 15, 1763
20
male check shirt with white patch, linsey

woolsey double breasted jacket- no
buttons, red cap, long striped trowsers, no
shoes, linen neckcloth
Tom
August 18, 1763
30
male red waistcoat faced with white, gray coat

faced with red
Wall
August 25, 1763
40
male red coat, manchester velvet jacket, thread

stockings, new shoes
Sam
September 29,
1763
about 30 male narrow brimmed hat cockd on one side,

Lt. Brown coat, short shirts, scarlet
breeches, black worsted stockings
October 27, 1763 about 40 male white flannel jacket and drawers, duck
trowsers, homespun shirt
Caesar
trowsers, homespun shirt
pewter
buckles
October 27, 1763 about 17 male white flannel jacket and drawers, leather
breeches and homespun shirt
Mingo
trowsers and homespun shirt
Hannah
February 9, 1764 about 19 female green jacket, old home-spun petticoat, red
and white handkerchief about her neck,
mens shoes, old black crape gown, old
flowered apron, check one
Harry
has a hole in
each ear
September 1, 1763 about 40 male good cloaths, green striped jacket,

holland skirts,
Lester
Isaac
beads round
her arms and
neck
woman female oznaburgh frocks, trowsers, brown cloth

jacket without sleeves
Pompey
Baptist
Other
Adornment
September 20,
1764
man
male Lt. coloured double-breasted jacket, coarse steel buckles

white linen shirt, short wide trowsers, half and a scotch
worn shoes
bonnet
November 8, 1764
man
male new blue jacket , new stockings and shoes

without any buckles
November 8, 1764
man
male new blue jacket and breeches, new

stockings and shoes without any buckles
Pegg
December 13,
1764
about 40 female red cloak, white hat, pair of mens shoes,

callico gown, [a variety].
Cate
June 27, 1765
woman female striped home-spun petticoat, double

purple and white callico, short gown, old
stuff shoes without stockings
Sharp
July 4, 1765
about 20 male blur sailors jacket, checked shirt,

oznabrigs trowsers, old beaver hat
(cockd), pair of old shoes, no stockings
Toby
July 11, 1765
about 21 male brown fustian jacket, ozenbrigs shirt and

trowsers and an old beaver hat

First Name Surname
Advertisement
Date
Age
Clothing
John
January 16, 1766
Sal
April 24, 1766
Bill
May 1, 1766
about
20 or 22
male old red cloth jacket, home-spun trowsres
Charles
June 26, 1766
man
male brown jacket, blue short waist coat underneath, pair of trowsers, sailors round hat
October 8, 1768
about
45 to 50
Norway
August 1, 1768
about 33 male a blue coat with silver thread buttons,

reddish mixd color cloth waistcoat, white
plush breeches
Spier
December 10,
1770
about 15 male blue cloth coat, short white ditto under it,
old knit yellow breeches, shoes stockings,
hat sewn up all around
Syme
March 18, 1771
John
Baptist
Bristol
about
30 years
Sex
male good castor hat, ozenbrigs shirt, black

crape caravat, brown bearskin great coat,
cloth upper jacket lined with red striped
linsey, green napt, possesses one white
shirt, stockings
Other
Adornment
figure brass
buttons, square
steel buckles
about 28 female purple calico gown, striped cotton short

ditto, purple and white calico Joseph, old
plain gown, blue quilted petticoat, green
pettistone ditto
male
iron collar
has holes in
each ear for
earrings
about 24 male old thickset coat, old beaver hat, old

watch coat, other olds cloaths
September 2, 1771 about 15 male tow-cloth jacket, trowsers, oznabrigs

shirt, barelegged
Cato
October 19, 1772 about 22 male ozenbrigs shirt, jacket trowsers, new felt
hat, shoes stockings
Philis
January 4, 1773
woman female Lt. coloured calimaco gown, check apron,

black silk cloak, black peelong bonnet
Jack
January 11, 1773 about 33 male brown double-breasted short Forrest

Cloth Jacket, plain brass buttons, lined
with red baize, red baize under jacket,
leather breeches, blue yarn
Dick
January 11, 1773
19
male beaver hat (smartly cocked) new Lt.

coloured coat and green cuffs, buckskin
breeches, ribbed stockings (mixed colour)
silver
buckles
Prince
October 13, 1774
20
male brown thickset suit, band on his hat, his

hair tied up behind
silver loop
button, large
tupee before
John
Rattan
Joseph
Low
December 8, 1774 about 33 male Lt. coloured cloth coat, blue cloth
waistcoat and breeches
November 27,
1775
man
male possesses several suits of good cloaths
Daniel
February 5, 1776
about 9
male old brown surtout coat, cotton check shirt
Prince
July 15, 1776
James
July 22, 1776
about 21 male blue cloth jacket, white home-spun shirt,

trowsers
man
male old gray bearskin short coat, check shirt,

linen breeches, worsted stockings

First Name Surname
Caster
Tom
York
Advertisement
Date
Sex
Clothing
Other
Adornment
August 19, 1776 about 35 male white linen trowsers, tow shirt, pair of old brass buckles
shoes
September 9, 1776 about 50 male pair of brown tow trowsers, striped woolen
shirt, felt hat half worn, new shoes
waistcoat four parts- brown/white
Buckles
October 14, 1776 about 19 male old brown cloth jacket w/ plain yellow
metal buttons, red cloth collar , brown
cloth waistcoat w/ small yellow metal
buttons, check shirt, trowsers
shoes w/ yellow buckles,

old round hat
w/ gold ed.
Will
November 11,
1776
Ned
November 13,
1776
Fortune
Age
19
male white linen jacket w/ sleeves, blue cloth

breeches, white stockings, and a hat half
worn; Has knapsack full of clothes;
possesses broad cloth coat etc
about 12 male blue under jacket, whiteish wilton coat,

new blue duffle trowsres, check shirt
whiteish stockings
Brookman December 9, 1776 about 20 male red plush waistcoat, snuff coloured long
trowsers
Caesar
January 6, 1777
about 30 male wears a dirty looking cloth coat with

buttons of the same colour, round hat with
high crown, wears boots in wet weather;
has a variety of clothes
Loui
March 3, 1777
about 20 male short blue coat lapelled w/ yellow metal but- white cap
tons, white waistcoat and breeches, white
bound with
flannel trowsers, good shoes, stockings,
red
white shirt,
Joe
April 28, 1777
Sam
May 19, 1777
about 28 male property of the heirs of the late Widow

Hester Weyman
Chess
May 26, 1777
about 20 male blue coat breeches, fond of dress
Pompy
June 2, 1777
about 17 male red jacket, ozenbrigs shirt and trowsers,

shoes, stockings, jockey cap
Frank
June 14, 1777
18 or 19
Dick
July 28, 1777
man
Jerremy
August 4, 1777
Fortune
August 18, 1777 about 23 male osnaburgh Trowsers, spotted flannel jacket
young
fellow
set of silver
shoe and knee
buckles of open
work
male green cloth coat, waistcoat leather breeches
male brown coat with a cape, old black breeches,

may alter his dress: 2 check shirts, pair of
trowsers
male dark gray coat, jacket, white and check
shirts, sundry stripd trowsers, red and
white striped jacket
about 25 male black breeches & stockings, white cloth

coat w/ [. . .]d buttons, beaver hat
Tom
September 22,
1777
about 14 male striped jacket, trowsers, check shirt, no

shoes or stockings, jacket tied with pieces
of tape in place of buttons
Bet
October 20, 1777
woman female homespun pettycoat, callico short gown
Peter
November 3, 1777
about
13 or 14
silver buckles
in his [. . .]
male suit of brown fustian, suit of claret

2
coloured fine cloth /3rds worn, round hat,
several pair stripped trowsers, etc.

First Name Surname
Alick
Advertisement
Date
January 3, 1778
Age
Sex
Clothing
about 15 male check shirt, reddish coloured jacket,

onzaburg trowsers, leather cap
January 24, 1778 about 13 male red coat (turned up w/green), green
trowsers, blue jacket, coarse hat with gold
band
Diona
May 16, 1778
Jem
May 16, 1778
about 14 male hat, brown vest and trowsers
Phillis
June 6, 1778
about 25 female black and white striped wooly jacket and

petticoat and white bonnet
Hannah
August 1, 1778
about 14 female ozenbrig petticoat and shift, brown and

blue short gown and an old green bonnet
Belinda
Robert
18
stone buckle
female blue striped waistcoat, blue petticoat,

black hat, short red cloak w/ ermine on the
fore part
February 12, 1780 about 21 female brown jacket, red petticoat, white
handkerchief, high cap
Kupperth
Tom
March 29, 1780
about 19 male old regimentals
April 15, 1780
about
15 or 16
male had on a brown thicksett jacket and

osnaburg trowsers, old round hat shoes and
stockings
May 3, 1780
14 or 15 female had on flowered red and green flannel

petticoat and blue cloth jacket
York
May 20, 1780
about 12 male short brown waistcoat, check shirt, woolen

trowsers nearly white, blue cap
Toney
June 17, 1780
Cain
July 5, 1780
about 26 male brown short coat, w/white metal buttons,

brown waistcoat, white breeches, cockd
hat, black silk handkerchief about his head;
has sundry other wearing apparel
Tom
August 5, 1780
about 16 male thicksett jacket, and osnaburgh trowsers
boy
male brown sailors jacket, striped Holland

trowsers, check shirt and a bound hat
Scip
September 2, 1780 about 14 male check shirt, pair of striped trowsers
Fortune
September 2, 1780 about 18 male small round hat bound w/ silver lace
Jenny
September 6, 1780 about 14 female black callimanco coat, white linen

wrapper and cap; carried all clothes with
her
Rose
September 20,
1780
woman female green fluff petticoat, a red & white callico

short gown, red silk handkerchief, black
sattin bonnet
Will
October 18, 1780 about 17 male blue jacket [. . .] up with red, canvas pair
of breeches
Bob
November 1, 1780 about 12 male onzaburg frock, red jacket
Tony
Sim
Other
Adornment
December 13,
1780
Sampson
22
male short blue coat, white metal buttons,

striped jacket, long pair of blue trowsers
January 27, 1781 about 18 male white jacket, black hat w/red ribbon, pair
of boots, long blue and white trowsers
silver plated
buckle

First Name Surname
Advertisement
Date
Age
Sex
Clothing
Pleasant Queen Ann
March 3, 1781
woman female red moreen petticoat, brown short gown

w/ white lining, pair of brown ribbed
stockings
Prussia
March 21, 1781
about 21 female had a quantity of cloaths with her
Tom
May 2, 1781
boy
male brown cotton jacket, black velvet Jockey

cap, blue breeches, shoes and stockings
May 5, 1781
about
16 or 17
male old red jacket, white flannel one under it,

pair of white fearnought trowsers, a sailors
round hat
Pameila
June 27, 1781
18
Duff
May 30, 1781
boy
Luce
July 21, 1781
about 28 female homespun short gown and petticoat
Sarah
July 25, 1781
about 19 female white short gown and a cotton petticoat
July 25, 1781
about
21 or 22
July 25, 1781
about 12 male blue coat faced with red
Charles
York
Macaulay
Revers
Jack
Jane
female short purple callicoe gown, pink petticoat

male red waistcoat, check shirt, osnaburgh
trowsers, no shoes, nor hat
male brown coat with red cuffs and collar, and

osnaburgh trowsers
August 15, 1781 about 19 female two Lt. coloured callico short gowns,
black callimanco skirt and old stuff shoes
August 25, 1781
Mattis
boy
male coarse round hat, small striped jacket

w/out sleeves, check shirt, pair of Russia
[. . .] trowsers open at foot
August 25, 1781 about 22 male three check shirts, oznaburgh trowsers
and frock, pair of mottled nankeen breeches
patched on the Rt. Knee, striped jacket,
round hat.
Jacob
September 1, 1781 near 14
male red jacket, osnaburgh trowsers, check

shirt, no hat or shoes
Jack
September 1, 1781
male check shirt, trowsers
Bristol
October 3, 1781
Diana
October 10, 1781 about 14 female short red callico bed gown, osnaburgh
petticoat, blue handerchief
James
Tom
Other
Adornment
Herbert
14
about 14 male homespun linen shirt and trowsers
October 10, 1781
34
male brown jacket
Whit[. . .]en October 10, 1781
23
male green jacket
Peg
November 17,
1781
18
female blue cloth jacket w/ long sleeves (in the

form of a riding dress) w/ bright yellow
buttons
Tom
December 8, 1781
boy
male long scarlet coat, double lapelled w/ gilt

buttons, red jacket, double breasted, white
breeches, grey worsted ribbed stockings,
strong shoes, cap
Cudjoe
January 5, 1782
boy
male blue jacket, trowsers
Rachel
January 9, 1782
white metal
buttons
woman female dark callicoe short gown, homespun

petticoat without cloak or hat

First Name Surname
Polly
Jane
Advertisement
Date
Age
January 9, 1782
13
Sex
Clothing
female off without shoes, stockings, and wore a

blue baize frock
February 9, 1782 about 15 female pale green callimanco petticoat, red short
gown, scarlet cloak with hood
Lissa
February 13, 1782 about 24 female brown short gown, brown serge petticoat,
blue short cloak unbound with a cap to it;
possesses 2 callico long gowns, other . . .
Charlottee
March 6, 1782
19
March 13, 1782
boy
male black super-fine broad cloth coat,

waistcoat, black silk breeches & stockings,
beaver hat with crape around it
Tom
March 23, 1782
boy
male suit of morning
Joe
April 20, 1782
man
male blue short jacket, straw hat
James
April 24, 1782
16 or 17
Phillis
May 15, 1782
woman female brown strouding jacket, black shirt, cheque

apron, blue stockings, mens shoes
Bacchus
June 8, 1782
about 12 male white jacket, striped trowsers, no shoes or

hat
Caesar
Augustus
June 15, 1782
man
female white gown and petticoat
male cap [red, Lt. coloured] short brown coat,

white dimity jacket, homespun linen
trowsers
male regimental blue coat w/ red collar, red

waistcoat, linen trowsers, round hat
Jack
June 15, 1782
about 15 male blue and white striped linen jacket. Pair

of parsons grey board cloth trowsers, white
homespun linen shirt, small round hat
David
July 17, 1782
13 or 14
July 27, 1782
about 24 female shift and under petticoat
August 3, 1782
male scarlet waistcoat and trowsers
13 or 14 female white short gown, black calimanco skirt,

no cap, black bonnet
Tony
August 17, 1782
24
male short Lt. coloured wilton coat, callico

jacket, pair long brown silk trowsers, pair
new shoes, round black hat
Adam
August 17, 1782
19
male wore an officers old red coat faced with

white, gold basket button, brown jacket and
trowsers
John
Other
Adornment
Jackson
September 25,
1782
about 22 male Lt. coloured Fustian jacket, waistcoat,

breeches, cockd hat, green and red short
outside jacket, pair of black silk breeches
Peter
October 2, 1782
boy
male white linen shirt, white cloth waistcoat

without sleeves, striped Holland trowsers
Cato
October 12, 1782
boy
male blue short jacket, linen with green, and

long linen trowsers
Jack
October 16, 1782
10
male coarse white shirt, trowsers, old light

brown cloth jacket, round hat, without
shoes or stockings
pair of ear
bobs in her
ears

First Name Surname
Jack
Advertisement
Date
Age
Sex
October 16, 1782
boy
male blue waistcoat, striped jacket, canvas

trowsers, grey stockings, without a hat
Clothing
Other
Adornment
October 26, 1782 about 13 male check shirt, oznabrig trowsers, old red
coat w/ black collar and cuffs
London
October 30, 1782
Billy
Nancy
14
male white wollen waistcoat, breeches, and a

shirt
January 13, 1783 about 20 male common dress of a sailor, viz, a blue
jacket, pair of blue trowsers, round hat,
check shirt
Blond
February 15, 1783 woman female green baize wrapper, light coloured petticoat, bundle of other clothes
Seth
March 15, 1783
EBB
April 9, 1783
18
male brown coat (French fashion), grey cloth

coat, black breeches, large brimed bound
hat
Duff
April 28, 1783
boy
male brown jacket, new fustian trowsers, new

wool hat
Jack
May 10, 1783
about 23 male check shirt, blue waistcoat, blue coatee w/

red cape, long white trowsers, white
stockings
Cesar
June 14, 1783
about 26 male Lt. coloured cloth waistcoat, no sleeves,

white metal hole buttons, pair of jean
breeches, shoes stockings, half worn white
hat
Poll
June 14, 1783
about 13 female red cloath petticoat, Lt. Blue short gown,

home made
Luce
June 29, 1783
about 30 female green striped fluff gown (washed), dark

blue moreen petticoat, gauze cap, pink ribbons, no hat, dark purple callicoe gown
Jack
July 9, 1783
Lucy
Venus
about 14 female red baize jacket, petticoat, high heeld

shoes
between male osnaburg shirt, tow trowsers

11 and 12
August 13, 1783 about 28 female 2 short gowns, 2 petticoats, 1 striped bottom short gown, yellow ground callicoe,
black petticoat, one green
August 13, 1783
5 or 6
female tow cloth frock
August 16, 1783 little boy male blue coat w/ red cuffs and collar, fustian
trowsers, with buttons all down the sides
Madlane
October 3, 1783
about 12 female striped woollen rapper, dark blue petticoat w/ white flowers, bare footed
Kate
October 22, 1783
woman female callico short gown w/ blue and yellow

horses, carriages & soldiers, several caps w/
long ears
Thomas
November 3, 1783
man
male blue sailors jacket, green under waistcoat,

whitish woollen or oznabrig trowsers
Cuffey
November 5, 1783
man
male brown surtout-coat
Johannis
November 5, 1783
man
male blue & white striped linen jacket, with

shoes and stockings

First Name Surname
Advertisement
Date
Age
Sex
Clothing
Flora
November 12,
1783
44 or 45 female generally wears striped homespun; may

be in black
James
November 12,
1783
about 21 male wears dark brown; may be in black
Hector
November 19,
1783
18
male round hat, short coatee (Lt. Colour), cloth

waistcoat, watchcoat w/velvet cap, coating
pair of trowsers (grey), white stockings
Stepney
December 6, 1783
20
male green short coat, blue under waist-one,

buck-skin breeches w/ blue surtout-coat
Prince
December 6, 1783
17
male blue cloth trowsers, reddish sailors jacket, dk brown great coat
Sarah
December 17,
1783
30
female callicoe short gown, black shirt, black hat

trimmed w/ edging; took number of good
clothes
December 24,
1783
13
Other
Adornment
male blue short jacket, trowsers of the same

cloth
Note: The database of escapee advertisements was created by the Office of Public Education and Interpretation for the African
Burial Ground, primarily from the compilation in Hodges and Brown (1994).
Figure 139. A New York City merchants order for textiles

from England, with swatches of linen (tobine) attached,
1746 (Collection of the New-York Historical Society).
and, to a lesser extent, to those of the working poor.

City dwellers were well entrenched in the empire
of goods. Among the textile cargoes auctioned in
Manhattan in mid-April 1732 were Spanish cloth,
Holland linen, English damasks, Indian cherryderries
(similar to gingham), striped and flowered Persians
(thin, soft silk used for coat lining), China taffetas,
and garlicks (linens) from Silesia. Printed calicoes
and durants, glazed woolen stuffs touted for their
endurance, were available, also, along with buttons,
thread, and a few parcels of haberdashery (New-York
Gazette, March27, 1732).
New York lawmakers did not follow South Carolinas 1735 lead in prohibiting African workers from
wearing fancy, colorful fabrics. But disquiet about
the appearance of blacks lodged in a few Manhattan homes. Historian Shane White (1991:199200)
has explained that some New Yorkers of European
descent suspected smartly dressed Africans of having
a larcenous and insubordinate bent. Dry goods were
peripatetic in eighteenth-century Manhattan, as was
the citys workforce. Cloth and clothing shifted from
warehouses, shops, and home linen cupboards to
tavern-based fencing operations, and rates of prosecu-

tion for theft and the keeping of disreputable drinking
establishments rose in tandem as the century advanced
(see Greenberg 1974:138140). Africans, in turn,
deserted their posts, sometimes with a masters or a
mistresss clothing in tow.
Eighteenth-century attire was not always easy to
parse. Consider, for example, the garments Sarah possessed in 1732 (see Table50). Her wardrobe included
a suit (a term usually reserved for a complete outfit
cut from the same cloth), a petticoat, and three waistcoats, two made from homespun and the third from
striped satteen silk. Homespun and silk evoke
separate worlds, one characterized by frugality and the
other by wealth. Yet these commonplace words were
unstable signposts for the fabrics they named. Textile
terminology and fiber content varied from place to
place. Homespun, for English speakers, described
cloth that was unmilled and coarsely woven, but in
American usage, homespun meant homemade. The
quality of homemade cloth reflected the skills of
the sorter, the carder, the spinner, the washer, and
the weaver. Its texture ranged from coarse to fine,
and it attired housewives as well as servants and
the enslaved (Baumgarten 2002:78, 114115; Ulrich
2001:8493).
Satteen silk was ambiguous, too. Sateen denoted
a cotton textile with a shiny, satinlike face. Satin was
a twilled silk. Silk was sometimes blended with wool.
Sarahs owner, merchant Joseph Reade, may have been
hedging his bets about whether her striped waistcoat
had been cut from the genuine article or a lower-priced
imitation, but he did not claim that she had lifted her
clothes (for eighteenth-century fabric terminology, see
Cunnington etal. [1960] and Montgomery [1984]).
Like all clothing worn during the eighteenth century, Sarahs garments were sewn by hand. She may
have cut and stitched them herself. Sarah worked as
a domestic, as did many of the women interred at the
African Burial Ground, and Reade said that she was
handy with all kinds of housework. She probably
sewed the family linens. Sheets and undergarments
(shifts, drawers, and nightshirts) were typically made
at home (see Kidwell and Christman 1974:25).
Ready-made garments supplemented the apparel
women stitched in parlors and kitchens. Some of
the ready-made items black New Yorkers wore were
geared to sailors and soldiers (Kersey pea coats, widelegged trousers, and regimental attire). Other items
were marketed to the public at large (mens shirts and
waistcoats, womens cloaks and quilted petticoats, and
knee-length woolen and cotton stockings). Whether
Figure 140. Self-enclosed casing for a drawstring, on a gown

with set-in sleeves (18001810). Colonial Williamsburg
Collection (The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation).
imported from England or locally produced, readymade clothing often bore the mark of a second-class
product (Kidwell and Christman 1974:31). Unlike
bespoke suits and gowns, ready-made garments were
not cut and draped with a particular person in mind.
The generalization holds for leather breeches, which
were the province of specialized tailors like John
Baster. Like many ambitious artisans who hung out
their signs in Manhattan, Baster sought patronage from
gentlemen who wore custom-fitted leather breeches
for leisure and sports (see Baumgarten 2002:125).
But all sorts of breeches could be had at Basters
shop opposite the Old Slip Market. The phrase was
a tailors deft way of conveying his willingness to
supply ready-made items for workingmen (New-York
Gazette, October5, 1761).
Despite its loose fit, utilitarian attire registered
a few fashion trends. The waistlines on womens
short gowns migrated upward toward the end of the
1700sthe short gown pictured in Figure137 has a
high, or Empire, waist (on the design and construction of the short gown, see Kidwell [1978]). Necklines
and bodices continued to be fastened primarily with
drawstrings made with cords and tapes (Figure140).3
Leather and cloth breeches rode low on the hips. After
1730, breeches acquired a fall, or flap front, over the
center fly, which increased the number of buttons
needed to keep the breeches in place (Tortora and
Eubank 1998:232).
Buttons: Attention to appearance included buttons
as well as clothes. The writers of runaway advertiseOnly one woman listed in Table50 had buttons on her clothes:
Peg, who escaped in 1781. The buttons were bright yellow, and they
fastened a long-sleeved, blue cloth jacket. References to buttons
on short gowns are scarce, suggesting that buttons were atypical
(Kidwell 1978:56). An example of a short gown fastened with pins
can be found in Chapter11.
3
Figure 141. Example

of a salesmans sample
card, circa 1780, for
buttons made from
pinchbeck, a copper
alloy that retains its
polish (source: Albert
and Kent 1949:392).
ments noted the color, size, and placement of buttons

on mens attire and remarked when buttons were missing from a garment, or when alternative fasteners were
used. Pompeys linsey-woolsey double-breasted jacket,
mentioned in an advertisement published in 1763, was
bereft of buttons. Toms striped jacket was tied with
pieces of fabric tape when he escaped in 1777. In 1762
advertisements, Charles and Jack both had waistcoats
that fastened with silver cord. Hanibals brown short
jacket was described as having been closed with hooks
and eyes in a 1758 advertisement.
Although the runaway advertisements lack the
visual clarity of a salesmans sample card (Figure141), they highlight one of the ornamental contributions buttons made to everyday clothing. Practical
fasteners doubled as adornment by playing upon
color contrasts. White and yellow metal buttons
fastened brown, blue, and red jackets, surtouts (overcoats), and waistcoats (Jasper, 1758; Jack, 1773;
Cain, 1780; Tony, 1780; Jack 1762; Prince, 1761).
Yellow and gilt buttons enlivened blue and scarlet
coat lapels for Louis in 1777 and Tom in 1781. NorThe New York African Burial Ground
ways blue coat sported buttons covered with silver

thread in 1768.
Metal buttons and cuff links also carried eye-catching designs. A gold button with a basket motif fastened the old red officers coat Adam wore in 1782. The
motif may have resembled the cross weave stamped
on the metal-capped bone buttons from Burial181,
or on the sample attached to the salesmans card (see
Figure141, middle column, second row from bottom).
Eleven of the breeches buttons from Burial259 were
ridged. Three of their stylistic kin appear on the card
(see Figure141, column one, second row from top;
column two, fourth row from bottom; column three,
third row from bottom).
Not all button faces, of course, were designed for
the light of day. Buttons covered with thread and
cloth joined the ranks of undergarment fasteners in
the decades after 1650 (Cunnington and Cunnington 1981:16). Although a variety of undergarments
were available for men as the eighteenth century
progressed, the routine use of ready-made and custom-fitted underwear within and across occupational
groups is not known. Mens underdrawers are a case
in point. Cut full from plain-weave cotton or woolen
flannel, underdrawers fastened with fewer front buttons than breeches and lacked the flap over the center
fly. But long-tailed shirts tucked into trousers often
performed the work of underdrawers. Under waistcoats and undershirts also added warmth to mens
attire. Based on examples from costume collections,
the latter were cut like outer shirts and fastened with
a covered button at the neck or with covered buttons
down the front (see Baumgarten 1992). Workingwomens undergarments consisted of a chemise or
a slip beneath a petticoat and a gown. The chemise
and the slip typically fastened with tapes, strings, or
ribbons (Tortora and Eubank 1998:236).
Ready-made clothing would have come with
buttons already attached, but home sewers and ordinary consumers in need of fasteners might have
scrutinized the wares in a peddlers sack, a market
stall, a dry goods store, or a specialty shop. Henry
Whiteman, a brass button maker who served his
apprenticeship in Philadelphia, prospered in mideighteenth-century New York. Ten years after gaining a foothold in Manhattans lively garment sector,
Whiteman supplied buttons at wholesale and retail
prices under a Buttons and Buckles sign (New-York
Gazette, Revived in the Weekly Post-Boy, September17, 1750; New-York Gazette, October13, 1760).
Edward Andrews, a London-trained cutler, carried a

Chain of Custody
Figure 142. Gold octagonal cuff links on an infants shirt sleeve

(17301760). Colonial Williamsburg Collection (The Colonial
Williamsburg Foundation).
choice assortment of buttons for gentlemen, ladies,

and others (New-York Gazette and the Weekly PostBoy, Supplement, May 18, 1752). Braziers like
Thomas Yates and William Scandrett offered sundry kinds of buttons and cuff links at reasonable
rates (New-York Gazette, November19, 1759, and
April16, 1764).
Popular styles of buttons and cuff links could be
had in a range of materials and sizes. Burials238,
341, and 398 had copper-alloy versions of the gold
octagonal cuff links shown in Figure142.
Buttons were also recycled. For example, the bone
buttons from Burial313, which may have been covered with fabric or thread, might originally have been
button backs that were modified or reused. Recycling,
modification, and functional substitutionusing a
readily available item to perform the task of an item
that has become scarcewere a commonplace of African and African diasporic life during the seventeenth
and eighteenth centuries (see Posnansky 1999:3133).
Personal adornments were modified and recycled, too,
as explained in Chapter13.
The Button, Cuff Link, and

Aglet Assemblage and
Associated Cloth
The assemblage included 133buttons or portions
of buttons, 3aglets, and 1grommet or eyelet from
a clothing fastener. Cuff links were also recovered,
including 2sets (2pair of linked faces) and 3single
pairs (two faces only). Materials represented among
the clothing fasteners included copper alloy, pewter,
bone, and wood.
Almost all the buttons and cuff links were recovered during the field excavation of the burials. A few
were found during cleaning of skeletal remains in
the laboratory (the pewter button from Burial174;
bone-backed buttons and bone button fragments from
Burials181, 238, and 257; copper-alloy buttons associated with Burials379 and 387; a possible button
ring from Burial313 and a cuff-link remnant from
Burial392). In some cases, items were identified as
button or cuff-link fragments only after initial cleaning (the shanks from Burial10; the button ring from
Burial171; a copper-alloy button from Burial276; a
domed button from Burial379). All of the aglets were
recovered in the field but were identified as pins at
the time. They were recognized as aglets only after
research on eighteenth-century clothing had been
conducted and the archaeological literature had been
searched for examples of clothing artifacts from the
period when the burial ground was in use.
Several items were recorded in the field but were
missing from the laboratory at the time the Howard
University Archaeology Team came on board. Among
the items logged as missing were the cuff links
from Burials181 and the pewter button attributed to
Burial361.
Textiles were found in association with a number
of the metal clothing items, as listed in Table51.
Conservators noted a textile impression in association with the bone-and-copper-alloy buttons from
Burial181. Subsequent examination indicated that the
metal faces of these buttons were impressed with a
cross-weave design. Field notes on Burial6 indicated
possible textile fragments had adhered to the cranium,
but none was recovered.
Bone buttons were generally very stable. They
were cleaned and treated with a barrier coating. Metal
buttons were normally desalinized in deionized baths
and mechanically cleaned with a scalpel, then vacuum
impregnated with BTA and B-72. The cuff links from
Burials238 and 341 were treated with a 1percent solution of formic acid to loosen and soften the corrosion
products and then cleaned a second time in deionized
water. The aglets received the same treatment as the
pins. The staff at John Milner Associates took an initial
series of photographs.
Buttons, cuff links, and aglets were reexamined
by Howard University Archaeology Team personnel

Table 51. Textile and Leather Fragments Associated1.48
withinClothing Fasteners
Burial
No.
Catalog No(s).
Type of Fragment
10
234-B.012
wool, plain weave
Location was not recorded, but the fragment would

most likely have been attached to a button.
22
344-B.004
linen
Location was not recorded. An aglet and pins were

recovered with the burial. The linen fragment may
have been part of a shroud.
194
1109-B.002
organic matter
A fragment of organic matter, possibly a leather

button cover, was associated with a copper-alloy
shank. The shank may have been from a poorly
preserved bone or wooden button.
203
1174-B.0011174-B.008
leather button covers
Eight wooden buttons were evidently covered in

leather.
259
1249-B.0021249-B.004,
1249-B.006, 1249-B.011,
1249-B 012, 1249-B.017,
1249-B.019,
1249-B.0211249-B.024
wool, linen, and

possible leather
Woven, fine wool fragments were associated with

some of the breeches buttons. One of these had a
well-preserved buttonhole. Conservators identified
linen fragments, but did not record which buttons
these fragments were associated with. Wooden
buttons appeared to have leather covers.
278
1275-UNC.001
textile (missing)
Conservators noted a textile fragment attached to the

back of a copper-alloy button, but it was not given
to the Howard University Archaeology Team.
326
1854-B.009
organic matter
Field records state that a small fragment of cloth, as

well as a bit of possible hair, had adhered to one of
the buttons. A small fragment of organic material
was cataloged (not photographed) but was not
identifiable.
371
1875-B.002
wool, weave
undeterminable
Fragment was associated with an iron button that

appears to have been intrusive to the burial.
379
1906-B.001
possible leather
button cover
The preserved remains of one of the buttons (No.

1906-B.001) may have been from a leather cover or,
alternatively, from the outer portion of a wooden
crown.
392
2039-B.0012039-B.003,
2039-B.006, 2039-B.007,
2039-B.011, 2039-B.012
wool, fine weave with

an S twist; one of the
fragments included a
button-hole
Fragments of fine wool were recovered in

association with the bone-button backs. One
fragment from a button at the right knee included a
well-preserved buttonhole 1 mm wider than the
associated button.
403
2067-B.004
textile, simple weave,

black color
It is not clear whether the cloth fragments were

associated with particular buttons.
415
2097-B.003, 2097-B.005,
2097-B.007, 2097-B.008
wool buttonhole fragment; wool fragment

attached to coffin wood;
possible leather
Comments
Because of a laboratory processing error, it is not

possible to identify the specific button associated
with the wool buttonhole. Another woolen fragment
was attached to coffin wood.
Figure 143. Diagram showing the process for covering a button blank or button ring with cloth (drawing by Alliah Humber).
during 19981999 and in 2001, and all fragments

were counted. Jon Abbott took final high-quality
photographs of the buttons and cuff links in August
2001. At that time, the assemblage was packed by the
Bronx Council of the Arts and shipped by Artex to
its art-storage facility in Landover, Maryland, pending preparation for reburial. The assemblage was
reinventoried by the Army Corps of Engineers at
the Landover facility in 2003, and then transshipped
back to New York. Items that National Park Service
staff selected for replication were sent to Colonial
Williamsburg for study; these included buttons and
cuff links from Burials6, 10, 181, 214, 250, 313, 392,
403, 405, and 415.
Items not selected for replication were sent to Jon
Abbott for digital photography in September 2003. A
series of high-quality digital photographs was taken
from many angles for each individual item, allowing
for future analysis. All clothing-related items were
placed in coffins for reburial in October of 2003.
Typology
In this section, we categorize the types of clothing
fasteners represented in the assemblage. The types
are based on materials employed in the manufacturing
process (organic, metallic, or composite) and structural
attributes (Table52). An attempt will be made to correlate these types with those represented in the following
published sources: Nol-Hume (1969), South (1964),
Hinks (1988), Cotter (1968), Stone (1974), and Olsen
(1963). Other attributes may be more important for
understanding button acquisition and use; for instance,
the number of parts (which may reflect cost/expense
of manufacture), decoration, the potential for reuse
and modification, durability and longevity, cost, and

availability of specific imports. We note these attributes in the inventory where possible.
The key characteristics of the buttons and cuff links
are summarized in the typology in Table52. Because
of the small quantity of aglets and cuff links recovered, no attempt was made to ascribe these objects to
particular types.
Type 1: Bone Backs or Molds for Thread-Covered Buttons: Type1 buttons are flat disks cut from
animal bone with a single, centrally located, drilled
hole. The preferred raw material appears to have been
the wide, flat, rib bones from large mammal species.
Sections of these bones were easy to secure, thereby
preventing movement during the cutting process. The
button blanks were cut and the hole drilled at the same
time by the use of specially designed metal bits that
were outfitted on a hand or powered drill press (see
the Diderot illustration of a mid-eighteenth-century
French manufacturer in Albert and Kent [1949:28]).
With the use of more refined bits, this process would
also form the offset rim on the back face for the
attachment of a metal cap. It should be noted that once
the button and hole were finished, the button blanks
could be used as is; those that were not finished or
considered defective could be put to an alternative
use. Also called a thread-back button, these types
of fasteners could be used either plain faced with a
thread shank or with a cloth or thread covering that
was sewn directly onto the garment (Figure143;
Albert and Kent 1949:4445). Small diameter sizes,
in the range of 915mm, were worn on waistcoats or
shirts, and larger sizes, measuring 1629mm, were
intended for coats. It is assumed these types of buttons
were of low cost and easy to manufacture.

Table 52. Button Types Recovered at the African Burial Ground
Hinks
b
Type
Olsen/
c
Cotter Type
ABG
Type
Noel-Hume/
a
South Type
15
(17261865)
Copper-alloy
ring for threadcovered buttons f
not listed
9B1
(17501840)
not listed
Composite
button with a
nonmetallic cap,
wood back, and
copper-alloy wire
loop shank g
not listed
with single-hole
type 9A2but
states single
hole was not
functional
not listed
Composite
button with a
stamped metal
cap, bone back,
and copper-alloy
wire loop shank h
4
(17261776)
5B3
(17501810)
Composite
button with a
stamped metal
cap, with
perforated (fourhole) bone back
3 with cap
(17261776)
5B2
Type B
Class III, Bone back; finely turned on both
(17501810) (17001790)
SA
sides with four holes; concave
front and convex back; also has
an offset rim. No shank; cap
has been removed so as to be
used as a simple sew through.
Button Types
Stone
d
Type
Description
Organic buttons
Bone backs or
molds for thread
covered buttons e
9A1w
nonfunctional Cat. 1,
waistcoat or button blank Type 1
shirt, 9A1c
coat (1680
1810)
Cut, flat disk with a single

central hole; with or without
turning marks and off-set rim
on at least one face; small
diameter for waistcoat or shirt,
915 mm; large diameter for
coat, 1629 mm.
Composite buttons
Class V, Copper-alloy ring with soldered

SA T1 (?) ends; provides framework for
thread or cloth covering; shirt
button.
Class V, Turned and cut wood disk with
SA (?) a single central hole; circular
recessed area on one face; copper-alloy-wire shank held in
place with a wire flange or
crimped end; possibly covered
with leather or cloth, may also
be painted or stained a dark
color.
Type B
Class III, Stamped sheet-metal cap;
variant
SA
usually decorated; with bone
17001790
back; finely turned on both
sides with a single central hole;
concave front and convex back;
offset rim. Wire loop shank:
exterior portion of shank
appears round in cross section,
whereas the ends of shank
(within the space between front
and back of the button) are
flattened and splayed outward;
shank is loose fitting.

Table 52. Button Types Recovered at the African Burial Ground (continued)
Button Types
ABG
Type
Noel-Hume/
a
South Type
Hinks
b
Type
Olsen/
c
Cotter Type
Stone
d
Type
Description
Metal buttons
Cast 2-and 3piece all metallic
buttons with wire
loop shank
Type C,
Types 7, 8, 9,
Type 2
D, and E
and 11 (1726 (1690s to
early nine- (17501812)
1776); Type
11 also occurs teenth century)
in mid-nineteenth century
CI, SD Cast two-piece button; crown

cast around a separate wirelooped eye in a raised or coneshaped boss; mold marks have
been removed by hand filing or
machine spinning the back.
Types 2 and 6
Type 3
(17261776) (1680s1770s)
CII, SA Cast three-piece button; cast front

and back; flux joined after a separate wire-loop eye is inserted
through back plate; shank is
either braised or loose; without
holes (one or two) on back.
not listed
From Noel-Hume (1969); South (1964).

From Hinks (1988).
c
From Cotter (1968); Olsen (1963).
d
From Stone (1974).
e
Found in 17701780 contexts.
f
Post-1750 manufacture in England.
g
Hinks (1988:89) has noted that wood buttons were found on inexpensive clothing.
h
Found in ca. 1784 contexts (Hinks 1988:125126).
b
A total of 19buttons of this type were recovered

from eight burials at the African Burial Ground: Burials37, 171, 238, 257, 313, 333, 353, and 385. None
of the examples in the collection was decorated, and
no textile remains were recovered in association with
any of the buttons. In most cases, these were the only
type of button found with the individual. They were
not used in conjunction with metal caps.
Type 2: Copper-Alloy Rings for Thread- or ClothCovered Buttons: Type2 buttons are composed
of small copper-alloy rings manufactured of drawn
wire and covered by thread or cloth. The ends of
the wire were apparently braised together to form a
1012-mm-diameter ring. Also known as Dorset buttons, this type of button was made in England in the
seventeenth century; production continued into the
mid-nineteenth century (Albert and Kent 1949:90;
Luscomb 1967:57).
Two buttons of this type were recovered at the New
York African Burial Ground, from Burials171 and
313. None of the examples in the collection contained
the thread covering, nor were any textiles found in
association with the buttons.
Type 3: Composite Button, Wood with a Nonmetallic Covering and Copper-Alloy Wire Loop
Shank: Type3 buttons are composed of a wooden

body, a metal shank, and possibly a cloth or leather
covering sewn over the button face. The buttons are
cut from fine-grained hardwoods, such as apple, yew,
or boxwood, that are lathe-turned into long, dowel-like
rods. Individual buttons blanks are then sawed from
the dowels end. A single central hole is drilled through
the wooden disk (Albert and Kent 1949:26). On the
examples recovered from the New York African Burial
Ground, the front face of the button contained a circular recessed area, evidently required to secure and
provide space for the copper-alloy wire shank. Finally,
the buttons face and the exposed ends of the shanks
were covered with leather or cloth. Painting or staining the button a dark color was an alternative surface
treatment. These buttons measured approximately
16mm in width.
To prevent the shank from pulling through the
button face, the wire loops were attached and held in
place in a variety of ways. In some of the specimens
recovered from the New York African Burial Ground,
the ends of the shank appear to have either been
splayed or twisted; in others, the ends were crimped
to form a wider protuberance or, possibly, a piece of
wire was wound around the ends of the shank. Beyond

the use of pin shanks (a wire that is pushed through
the body of the button and is looped back to form a
shank), the type of shank observed at the New York
African Burial Ground has not been detailed in the
literature on button manufacture.
from five burials (Burials10, 194, 203, 214, 259, and
379) at the New York African Burial Ground.
Type 4: Composite Button with a Stamped
Metal Cap and Bone Back with Single Hole for
a Copper-Alloy Wire Loop Shank: Type4 buttons
consist of a die-stamped, copper-alloy sheet-metal
cap, usually decorated, covering a bone back and a
fastener composed of a copper-alloy wire loop shank.
The bone backs were finely turned on both sides with
a single, central hole, a concave front, a convex back,
and a well-defined, offset rim. The loose fitting wire
loop shanks were placed within the concave space
between the cap and front of the button back prior
to the caps attachment. There was some variation
in the shape of the wire loop shank: in one example
from Burial181 (Catalog No.967-B.006), the exterior
portion of the shank appears round in cross section,
whereas the ends of the shank (within the space
between the front and back of the button) were flattened and splayed outward. The caps are decorated
by either die stamping or repouss and subsequently
gold plated. This type of button was manufactured
throughout the eighteenth century, according to Albert
and Kent (1949:29).
Four buttons of this type were recovered at the
New York African Burial Ground, all from Burial181.
No textiles were found in association with any of the
bone-backed buttons.
Type 5: Bone-Backed Buttons with Multiple
Perforations (Originally Composite Buttons with
Stamped Caps): Type5 buttons are very similar to
Type4 buttons, the main difference being the manner
in which the button was attached to the garment. As
originally designed, the button was manufactured with
a die-stamped, copper-alloy, sheet-metal cap, usually
decorated, that was fitted over a bone back. The back
was finely turned on both sides with a concave front
and convex back and a defined, offset rim on the back.
Each of the specimens contained four drilled holes
and a shallow central impression on the back, which
is produced during the manufacturing process. In
contrast to the Type4 loop shank set in a single hole,
the holes in the Type5 back are laced with thread,
catgut, or wire to form a shank.
Only the bone backs were present in the burial

ground assemblage. There was a slight greenish tinge
on some of the examples. It is possible that the buttons
metal components had been removed and the bone
backs reused as simple sew-through buttons. Alternatively, all trace of the metal caps had decomposed
beyond recognition. No other components of these
buttons, such as pieces of metal caps or wire shanks,
were present in the assemblage. This was a common
button type during the eighteenth century.
at the New York African Burial Ground, all from
Burial392. Fragments of fine wool were recovered
in association with the bone button backs. A wool
fragment from a button at the right knee included a
well-preserved, thread-finished buttonhole.
Type 6: Cast Two-Piece, All-Metallic Buttons:
Type6 buttons consist of a cast, two-piece button with
the crown cast around a separate, wire-looped eye
in a raised or cone-shaped boss of metal. This type
also includes specimens in which the loop shank was
braised directly to the buttons back. The crown face
was usually flat or slightly convex, occasionally with
a beveled or cupped back edge. In most specimens,
any marks derived from the manufacturing process
had been removed as a result of the back being hand
filed or machine spun. For the latter method, individual
buttons are set in a collet or chucka device used for
holding cylindrical objects in a latheand spun at a
high speed; a handheld chisel is used to cut and trim
excess metal castings from the back and boss (Olsen
1963:552). This type of button was usually covered
with cloth or decorated with a variety of motifs produced during the manufacturing process. Decorated
buttons without cloth covers were also given a high
polish or, alternatively, were plated with gold or tin.
at the New York African Burial Ground from a total
of 13burials (Burials6, 10, 181, 191, 243, 250, 259,
276, 278, 325, 366, 403, and 405).
Two of the buttons of this type found with Burial6
were decorated with anchors and gilt. As described
in the inventory, the two specimens did not match,
although based on their locations, they are believed
to have adorned a jacket or coat. Anchor buttons were
used on British naval officers uniforms from 1774
and may have been more generally available in New
York just before, during, and after the Revolution
(see Troiani [2001:910] for illustrations of British
naval officers anchor buttons). Because buttons were
Figure 144. Buttons from Burial 6 associated

with a mans coat or jacket: top row, Catalog
Nos. 219-B.001, 219-B.002, and 219-B.003;
bottom row, Catalog Nos. 219-B.004 and 219B.008. Largest button is 26 mm in diameter
often obtained separately from clothing and were

typically recycled, we do not identify this man as a
naval officer based on his burial in a jacket bearing
two anchor buttons. The motifs may have signaled
his occupation, whether as a sailor or a member of
the navy, but they also may have been chosen for
aesthetic or other reasons.
Type 7: Cast Three-Piece, All-Metallic Buttons:
Type7 buttons are dome-shaped, all-metal buttons
composed of separately cast fronts and backs. The
two halves are joined or braised at a high temperature
with the aid of a fluxing agent. Prior to joining the two
portions, a separate wire loop eye (the third piece) is
inserted through a single hole in the back plate and
braised or set in place. Distinctive characteristics of
this type of button are the presence of an additional
small hole(s) on the buttons back. These openings
allow the heated, expanding gases within the hollow
space to escape during the braising process, which
would prevent the two halves from joining. This type
of button was usually decorated during the casting
process, or, as was the case for some specimens from
the New York African Burial Ground, the entire button was gilded.
A total of 24buttons of this type were recovered at
the New York African Burial Ground, from Burials10,
181, 214, 271, 326, 379, 403, and 415. Seventeen of
the buttons were in matching sets found with the two
individuals in Burials326 and 415. Evidence of gilding was preserved on buttons in Burial415.
Button/Fastener Inventory by
Individual Burial
Burial 6: Eight buttons were recovered from Burial6,
a Late Group interment of an adult, probably a man,
between 25 and 30years old. Five of the buttons were
evidently attached to a coat or jacket in which the
individual was buried, but as Figure144 illustrates,
they did not form a matched set. These buttons were,
for the most part, dissimilar in decoration and manufacture. The two buttons with anchor motifs did not
match (Figures 145 and 146).
Button 219-B.001 was made of cast copper alloy
that had been gilded on each side; it had an applied
wire loop shank. The 17-mm-diameter button was
decorated with an upright foul anchor device on a
plain ground. Both the centrally located device and
the gilding were well preserved. In finely executed
detail, the anchors rope extended down from the
left side of the ring, passing behind the end of the
left stock (a guide to anchor terminology is provided
in the key to Figure147). It then looped first to the
right, passing in front of the shank, and then to the
left, passing behind the shank. The rope continued to
the left, passing in back of the bill of the left fluke,
then looped to the right below the anchors left arm
and crown. Finally, it passed behind the center point
of the right arm, ending with a short section of rope
that extended down from the anchors right bill.
Figure 145. Gilt,

copper-alloy
button from
Burial 6 (Catalog
No. 219-B.001).
Diameter is 17 mm
(photograph by Jon
Abbott).
Figure 147. Diagram of anchor device: left, upright anchor;

right, upright foul anchor. Key is as follows: 1 = ring; 2 =
stock; 3 = shank; 4 = bill; 5 = fluke; 6 = arm; 7 = throat; 8
= crown; 9 = rope (source: Luscomb 1974:32).
Button 219-B.004 was comparable to the previous

example in terms of manufacture, decoration, and
preservation. This button, however, was of heavier
construction and had a larger loop shank and a more
concave back. The primary differences between the
two buttons were in the details of the anchor design,
in particular the use of a chain rather than a rope.
Overall, the upright foul anchor on the second button,
although just as detailed, was slightly larger in scale
and covered more of the buttons face. Another minor
difference was the distance between the top ring and
the shank, which, in the second button, was negligible.
The layout of the chain in relation to the anchor was
essentially identical to button 219-B.001.
Button 219-B.003 was a 17-mm copper-alloy disk
with a wire shank fastened to the back during the castThe New York African Burial Ground
Figure 146. Gilt,

copper-alloy
button from
Burial 6 (Catalog
No. 219-B.004).
Diameter is 17 mm
(photograph by Jon
Abbott).
ing process (see Figure144, top row, right). The ends

of the loop shank were set in a cast boss of metal and
the back had been spun and cut. The gilt button evidently contained a central decoration on a plain ground,
but owing to corrosion, no elements survived.
Button 219-B.002 was also a 17-mm copper-alloy
fastener with a wire shank attached during the casting
(see Figure144, top row, middle). The lack of cut
marks on the back seemed to indicate the button had
not been spun. However, the metal boss surrounding
the ends of the shank had been hand trimmed or filed
in the area adjacent to the long axis of the shank,
leaving a mound of metal along one side. The button
did not appear to have been decorated beyond a possible high polish.
Button 219-B.008 (see Figure144, bottom row,
right), the final whole button, was of cast copper
alloy and was found on the sacrum. The 26-mm
diameter button, one of the collections largest, was
manufactured with an alpha loop shank and appeared
to have had a stamped decoration on its face. Not
only was this button comparable in size to most of
the coins recovered from the burial ground, there
appeared to be some design elements on the face
that were similar to coins of the eighteenth century.
Poor preservation, however, makes it impossible to
determine whether a coin had been converted into
a button or if a coin die had been used to strike the
decoration.
Portions of at least three pewter buttons were
recovered from the burial (12 fragments, Catalog
Figure 148. Buttons from Burial 10 associated

with a mans coat or jacket (Catalog Nos. 234B.001234-B.007). Buttons are 17mm in
diameter (photograph by Jon Abbott).
No.219-B.007). Field notes indicated that a pewter

fragment was located on the sacrum. However, the
exact size, shape, and type of manufacture of the
pewter buttons could not be determined because of
their fragmentary state. Field notes indicated possible
textile fragments adhered to the cranium, but none
was recovered.
Burial 10: Thirteen buttons were recovered from
Burial10, which held a 4045-year-old man. The
burial has been assigned to the Late-Middle Group.
Seven buttons found on the torso apparently fastened a
coat or jacket (Figure148). One button was located at
the right foot. An additional five buttons were inferred
from wire shanks (unique objects unassociated with
the coat buttons) recovered from the lower right leg.
The shank fragments likely represented the remnants
of composite buttons constructed of organic materials, such as wood or bone, and metal. In contrast to
Burial6, the coat buttons recovered from Burial10
formed a matched set.
The coat buttons were cast copper-alloy with a
copper-alloy wire alpha loop shank applied during
manufacture. All of the buttons measured 17mm in
diameter and, with the exception of a slightly beveled
edge, all were undecorated and had evidence of a
polished face. The conservators notes stated that the
buttons were possibly tin plated on the front surface.
The backs of these buttons were turned and had lost
the upper, rounded portion of the eye shank.
Button 234-B.013 was a domed two-part copperalloy button with a copper-alloy shank cast in place.
Recovered from the area of the right foot, the button
measured 16mm in diameter, and although the face
was corroded, the button did not appear to have been

decorated (Figure149). The front had a ground edge.
The five copper-alloy wire shanks recovered from
the right leg were identified in the field as eyelets.
The lack of any corresponding hooks would indicate
that the items (Catalog Nos.234-B.008234-B.012)
were probably the shank portions from composite
buttons, which presumably were covered with cloth.
The ends of each shank were either bent flat or splayed
outward; this would have prevented the shank from
pulling through the front of the button. One shank had
a tight twist at the end, resembling a continuous loop
(Figure150, Catalog No.234-B.010; see also Figure151 for another example of a copper-alloy shank
from this burial). Other well-preserved examples of
this type of button shank were found with Burials259
and 379.
The conservation inventory listed a cuff-link fragment, but no such item was present when the Howard
University Archaeology Team began its work. It is
likely the item was actually one of the buttons or
button shanks. A textile fragment (Catalog No.234B.012; Figure152), identified as plain weave wool,
was recovered, and although no provenience was
recorded, it is likely the fragment was associated with
one of the buttons.
Burial 22: A single aglet was recovered from
Burial22, a Middle Group interment of a young child
between 2.5 and 4.5years old. The item (Figure153)
was not noted during excavation, and its location
on the body is not known. The aglet may have been
mistaken for a pin; three pins were recorded clearly
in situ on the torso, with an additional one on top of
Figure 149. Copper-alloy button from Burial 10: (a) face; (b) back (Catalog No. 234-B.013). Diameter is 16mm (photograph by Jon
Abbott).
Figure 150. Copper-alloy button shank from Burial 10 (Catalog No.

234-B.010). Length is 11 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 152. Plain-weave wool textile fragment from Burial 10

(Catalog No. 234-B.012). Length is 20 mm (photograph by Jon
Abbott).
Figure 151. Copper-alloy button shank from Burial 10 (Catalog No.

Figure 153. Copper-alloy aglet from Burial 22 (Catalog No.

Figure 154. Bone button from Burial 37 (Catalog No. 460-B.001).

Diameter is 13 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 155. Gilt, copper-alloy cuff links from Burial 158 (Catalog No.
903-B.001). Face diameter is 17 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 156. Turned bone button from Burial 171 (Catalog No.
931-B.002). Diameter is 22 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
the skull. A tiny fragment of linen was also recovered

from the burial.
Burial 32: A fragment from a cast, one-piece pewter button was recovered from Burial32, a Middle
Group interment of a man between 50 and 60years
of age. The size and shape of the button (Catalog
No.420-UNK.002) could not be determined. There
was no mention or depiction of the button in the field
records.
Burial 37: A turned bone button with a drilled center hole (Catalog No.460-B.001) was recovered near
the left wrist of the 4555-year-old man in Burial37, a
Late Group interment. The 13-mm button (Figure154)
apparently had been covered with cloth or thread
and had a thread shank, an assessment based on the
absence of staining typically found on bone buttons
that had copper-alloy metal caps (see Burial181 for
an example).
Burial 158: A pair of round gilt copper-alloy cuff

links was recovered from each wrist of the 2030year-old man in Burial158, a Late Group interment.
The pair from the left wrist (Catalog No.903-B.001)
is shown in Figure155. It matched the pair from the
right wrist (Catalog No.903-B.002). The cuff links
measured 17mm in diameter and had cast U-shaped
shanks, possibly diagnostic of the seventeenth century
or the first half of the eighteenth century (Nol Hume
1961:383). With the exception of the gold plating
and a possible raised edge, there were no discernable
decorative elements.
Burial 171: Three buttons, two made from animal
bone and one represented by a copper-alloy button
ring, were recovered about the body and within the
coffin from Burial171, a Late Group interment of
a man between 44 and 60years of age. The bone
buttons each had a single, central drilled hole. The
larger of the buttons (Catalog No.931-B.002) was
found beside the right femur. It measured 22mm in
diameter and was turned on both sides with a relatively
wide offset rim (Figure156). The offset rim was not
as well manufactured as the examples of this button
type from Burial181.
The smaller bone button (Catalog No.931-B.001),
from the right scapula, measured 10mm in diameter
and was a less finished object. In addition to being
turned only on one side, leaving a rough, natural
surface (the inner wall of the bone), the edge of
the button was left untrimmed from the cutting tool
(Figure157). The absence of metal shanks or any
evidence of metallic staining on the bone buttons indicated they were thread or cloth covered and attached
with a thread shank. The edges of the sewing holes,
Figure 157. Turned bone button from Burial 171 (Catalog No.
particularly on the smaller button, were worn and

abraded. It is possible these buttons were originally
button backs that were modified or reused, either by
removing the metal cap or by reusing buttons that
had lost their shanks.
The remains of a copper-alloy ring were found on
the sternum. The ring (Catalog No.931-B.003) may
have functioned as the frame for a thread or cloth button (Figure158). The curved fragments were identified
initially as shroud pins. The smaller of the bone buttons may have fastened a shirt collar, but the locations
of the buttons do not strongly indicate a particular item
of clothing they might have been used for.
Burial 174: Burial174, another Late Group interment, held a man between 17 and 18years of age. Two
highly degraded pewter buttons (Catalog Nos.940B.001 and 940-B.002) were recovered during the
cleaning of the skeletal remains at the Cobb Labora-
Figure 158. Copper-alloy button ring from Burial 171 (Catalog

No. 931-B.003). Interior diameter is approximately 12 mm
tory, Howard University. The buttons were located

on the lumbar vertebrae and the right innominate.
The exact size and shape of the buttons could not be
determined because of the fragmentary nature of the
items, and there were no identifying attributes to suggest method of manufacture. Based on their locations,
they may have fastened breeches.
Burial 181: Burial181, a coffinless burial assigned
to the Late Group, held a man between 20 and 23years
old. Six buttonsthree made from copper alloy
and three made from copper alloy and bonewere
recorded in situ (Figure159). A seventh button, also
a bone-and-copper-alloy composite, was recovered
in the laboratory, but the provenience is unknown. In
addition, laboratory records indicate that copper-alloy
cuff links attributed to this burial were treated by the
conservator but were subsequently noted as missing.
No cuff links were mentioned in the field notes or
Figure 159. Detail of the disturbed Burial 181 with

buttons in the pelvic area. Scale is 1 inch = 1 foot (in situ
drawing by M. Schur).
Figure 160. Copper-alloy, with zinc and nickel, button from Burial
181 (Catalog No. 967-B.001). Diameter is 20 mm (photograph by
Jon Abbott).
Figure 161. Copper-alloy, with zinc and nickel, button from Burial
181 (Catalog No. 967-B.008). Diameter is 29 mm (photograph by Jon
Abbott).
Figure 162. Copper-alloy button from Burial 181 (Catalog No. 967-B.009): (a) face; (b) back. Diameter is approximately 22 mm
depicted on field drawings, and none was found in the

laboratory when the Howard University Archaeology
Team began its work.
The three metal buttons (Catalog Nos.967-B.001,
967-B.008, and 967-B.009) varied in manufacture
and size. Button 967-B.001 (Figure160) was a cast
one-piece copper-alloy button that evidently contained
zinc and nickel. It had a spun back and a drilled shank.
The relatively flat disk, found at the head of the mans
right femur, measured approximately 20mm in diameter. The button appeared to have been decorated, but
no design elements were identified because of the
extensive corrosion.
Button 967-B.008 (Figure161), also from the pelvic area, was a slightly concave, cast disk of copper
alloy with zinc and nickel. It measured 29mm in
diameter. The button had an applied loop shank and
the back was evidently spun. There were no decorative

elements on the buttons face.
Button 967-B.009 (Figure162) was the front portion of a copper-alloy domed button with a stamped
decoration. The button, which measured approximately
22mm in diameter, was probably of a cast, two-piece
construction, with a braised or flux-joined seam. No
remains of the buttons back or the shank were recovered in the field. The cast, central decoration was
located within a circular recessed area, 13mm wide,
and appeared to have had an overlapping scalloped
design, possibly representing the petals from a stylized
Tudor Rose. The back of the object contained a large,
off-center mass of metal. The untrimmed mass was
evidently a part of the manufacturing process.
The four composite buttons had stamped copper-alloy faces and turned bone backs with looped copper-al-
Figure 163. Copper-alloy button, with bone back, from Burial

181 (Catalog No. 967-B.002). Note remains of the buttons cap
and impressions of crisscross pattern to the left of the bone back.
Fragments of the impressed and gilded decoration of the cap
and impressions on soil clods are in the upper left portion of the
photograph. Diameter is 25 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 165. Bone and copper-alloy button from Burial 181 (Catalog
No. 967-B.005). Note the repouss (raised impression) decoration
on the preserved fragment of the cap. Fragment is attached to the
end of the shank, which rests against the front, concave side of the
bone disc. Diameter is 16 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 166. Bone and copper-alloy

button from Burial 181 (Catalog No. 967B.006): (a) back; (b) detail of flattened
shank. Diameter is 25 mm (photograph
by Jon Abbott).
Figure 164. Copper-alloy button, with bone back, from Burial 181
(Catalog No. 967-B.003). Diameter is 25 mm (photograph by Jon
Abbott).
loy wire shanks (Catalog Nos.967-B.002, 967-B.003,

967-B.005, and 967-B.006; Figures163166). All
of the items appeared to have been decorated with
repouss or impressed designs. The best-preserved
button (967-B.002, see Figure 163) bore a simple
cross-weave pattern finished with gold plating. The
design was discernable on fragments of the metal cap
and was also impressed on small fragments of soil that
adhered to the button.
Buttons 967-B.002, 967-B.003, and 967-B.006
measured approximately 25mm in diameter, although
they would have been slightly larger with the thin,
sheet-metal caps in place. The bone backs for these
three examples were identical in type of manufacture. Concentric turning marks and a narrow, offset
rim were evident on each side of each button back.
There was a slight concavity to the button backs inner
surface, whereas the opposing surface was convex.
Each had been stained by the decomposition of the
copper-alloy caps.

Button 967-B.005 (see Figure165) was slightly
smaller in size than the other composite buttons. This
example measured 16mm in diameter. Portions of the
front cap were in place, as well as a complete copperalloy loop shank. Although the button face appeared
to have been decorated, no design elements or any
evidence of gilt were preserved.
The composite buttons from Burial181 yielded some
interesting manufacturing details. Unlike the flat bone
disks found on other burials, the front side of the bone
button back was concave to provide a space for the
ends of the wire loop shank. In one example (Catalog
No.967-B.006) the ends of the wire loop shank were
flattened (see Figure166). The shanks ribbonlike shape
may have served the purpose of making the end of the
shank wider and therefore less likely to pull out. This
is in contrast to the sew-through portion or eye of the
shank, which was formed of rounded wire. Placement
of the ends of the wire shank through the bone back preceded the attachment of the metal cap. These examples
do not appear to have had metal back plates.
Although Burial181 was disturbed, the button
locations in the pelvic area of the skeletal remains
are suggestive of trousers. The four matched, composite specimens may have fastened the trouser front.
The two flat metal buttons may also have been from
this garment. The domed button was found slightly
further up the torso area and may not have fastened
the trousers.
Burial 191: Burial191, a Late Group interment of
a man between 25 and 30years old, contained one
copper-alloy button. Located at the left ilium, the button measured 17mm in diameter and was cast in one
piece with a loop shank (Figure167). Although the
back of the flat disk appeared to have been spun, the
front face had a few raised features that suggest the
button was decorated. In particular, the raised, wavy
lines are suggestive of a crown and/or shield, design
elements found on contemporaneous coins.
Burial 194: A single copper-alloy button shank
was found near the head of the right femur of the
3040-year-old man in Burial194, a Late Group
interment. An organic fragment, possibly a leather
button cover, was associated with the shank. The
shank may have been from a poorly preserved bone
or wooden button.
Burial 203: Burial203, a Late Group interment,
held an individual between 12 and 18years old. The
skeletal remains offered no clear indication of the
individuals sex, but the material and positioning of
the button fragments recovered with the individual
Figure 167. Copper-alloy button from Burial 191 (Catalog No.

were typical of eighteenth-century knee breeches,

suggesting that Burial203 was a young man. Field
records depict buttons at distinct locations on the
individual: at the knees, the wrists, and the pelvic
area.
The button fragments from Burial203 represented
a total of eight separate wood buttons, which had
copper-alloy wire shanks and evidently had been faced
with leather (Catalog Nos.1174-B.0011174-B.008).
Field notes refer to 14buttons, which were depicted
on the in situ drawing. The discrepancy in count
between the field staff and the laboratory staff may
have stemmed from counting displaced fragments as
individual buttons (Figure168; note the bottom right
specimen fragmented into two layers). In general, the
shank portions of the buttons were less well preserved
than the crowns.
The eight buttons were identical in terms of manufacture and material. Based on an overall assessment
of the recovered fragments, the wooden button disks
measured approximately 1415mm in diameter and
appeared to have been manufactured from a finegrained wood species.
Although the button stock was evidently lathe
turned and subsequently cut into thin disks, there
were no surviving features of this process on the face
or back of any of the buttons. Unlike the turned bone
discs used for button backs (e.g.,Burial181), which
had a concave front side to allow space for the ends
of the wire loop shank, these buttons had a circular,
shallow, recessed area on the button face (Figure169).
The recessed area provided a space for the ends of the
wire loop shank. The loop portion of the shank would
have been on the buttons flat back (Figure170).
The copper-alloy wire shanks from these buttons
were poorly preserved, as noted, and no complete

Figure 168. Wood buttons apparently faced with leather,
with copper-alloy shanks, from Burial 203 (Catalog Nos.
1174-B.0011174-B.008). Diameters are 1315 mm
Figure 169. Front of wood button from Burial 203 (Catalog No.
1174-B). Note the recessed area on the front of the face: the hole
for the shank had apparently been enlarged by wear. Scale is in
millimeters (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 171. Detail of copper-alloy button shank

fragment from Burial 203 (Catalog No. 1174-B). Scale
is in millimeters (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 170. Back of wood button from Burial 203 (Catalog No.
1174-B.007). Scale is in millimeters (photograph by Jon Abbott).
shanks were recovered. Based on the best-preserved

example (Figure171), the ends of the wire shank were
tightly twisted but not splayed, thus raising the question
of how they would have been held in place. It is possible that the ends of the shanks were missing because
of corrosion. It is also possible that a piece of wire had
been wound around the end of each shank to prevent it
from pulling through the central hole. An example of
this type of shank was found with Burial379.
The eight composite wood and metal buttons were
apparently finished with a small piece of material,
which was identified as leather by the conservators.
The material covered the recessed face of the wood
disk and was probably tightly sewn over the back of
the button, as illustrated in Figure143. Although the
wooden disk buttons did not have the overall green
staining associated with copper-alloy covers on bone
discs (as in Burial181), the rust present on many of
the fragments may indicate that the wood button was
Figure 172. Wood button from Burial 203 (Catalog No. 1174-B).
Note the corroded ends of the copper-alloy shank. Diameter is
14 mm. Scale is in millimeters (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 173. Copper-alloy aglet (with hair adhering) from Burial

213 (Catalog No. 1190-B.001). Length is 15 mm (photograph by
Jon Abbott).
Figure 174. Copper-alloy button back from Burial 214 (Catalog No. 1191-B.002): (a) front; (b) back. Diameter is 21 mm (photograph by
Jon Abbott).
capped with a thin sheet of poorly preserved, ironbased metal (Figure172).

Burial 211: A turquoise enamel cuff link face was
recovered near the chin of the adult in Burial 211, a
Late Group interment of a probable man. This item
is described and illustrated in Chapter 13.
Burial 213: One aglet (Catalog No.1190-B.001)
was recovered from Burial213, a Middle Group interment of a woman between 45 and 55years of age.
The aglet (Figure173) was found on the left parietal
with hair adhering to it (field records identified it as
a straight pin). The presence of an aglet on the skull
may indicate lacings on a cap, or a shroud drawstring.
Alternatively, it may have been displaced from the collar area. Note that the aglet recovered from Burial22
may also have been located on the skull.
Burial 214: Burial214 was assigned to the Late
Group. It held a man between 45 and 55years old.
Artifacts recorded in situ included a copper-alloy
button back (Catalog No.1191-B.002) near the right

shoulder, several button shank fragments, a straight
pin, and a coin and a knife handle (the latter items are
described in Chapter14).
The button back was from a 21-mm-diameter domed
button of two-piece construction, with a braised wire
shank. The ends of the wire loop shank appear to have
been flattened or crimped prior to the attachment of
the buttons front face (Figure174). Two degraded
copper-alloy shank fragments (Catalog No.1191B.004), possibly from button 1191-B.002, were also
recovered, but their provenience is unclear. Two iron
shank fragments were also recovered from the pelvic
area during laboratory cleaning of the skeletal remains
(Figure175). A third shank fragment and the remains
of a wooden button, Catalog Nos. 1191-SBH.001
and 1191-SBH.002, respectively (not pictured), were
recovered from a flotation soil sample taken from the
head area.
Figure 175. Possible iron button shank from Burial

214 (Catalog No. 1191-B.004). Scale is in millimeters
Figure 176. Copper-alloy cuff links from Burial 238 (Catalog Nos. 1224-B.001 [bottom] and 1224-B.002 [top]): (a) front; (b) back. Diameter
is 15 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 177. Detail
of decorative motif
on cuff-link faces
from Burial 238.
The location and fragmentary nature of the clothing-related artifacts from Burial214 was the result
of a later trash pit that affected the central part of the
grave shaft, disturbing the pelvic area.
Burial 238: Burial238, a Late-Middle Group interment, held a 4050-year-old man with a set of cast
copper-alloy cuff links. One pair was found on the
right radius (Catalog No.1224-B.001) and the other

pair, beneath the left radius (Catalog No.1224-B.002;
Figure176). The cuff links were octagonal in shape
with flat faces and backs and a small rear lip. The
faces measured 15mm across, and each had a cast, flat
shank with a drilled eye. The copper-alloy wire loops
connecting the cuff links measured approximately
16mm in length. The apparent raised semicircular
design or letter, which may be a by-product of corrosion, was located adjacent to one end of the shank.
A possible makers mark was noted on the back of
one of the faces (Catalog No.1224-B.001) but is not
visible in the photograph.
The four faces had identical decorations (Figure177). Along the outer edge were two narrow
octagonal bands. The outermost band was decorated
with what may have been an egg-and-dart motif, or
possibly a stylized Tudor Rose, whereas the inner
band was undecorated. The center had a circular
band with a decoration that repeated the design of
the octagonal band. The innermost circle appeared
to be stippled.
Figure 179. Copper-alloy button from Burial 243 (Catalog No. 1230B.001). Diameter is 27 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 180. Copper-alloy button from Burial 250 (Catalog No. 1239B.001). Diameter is 20 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
In addition to the cuff links, a very small single-hole

bone button (Catalog No.1224-B.003) was recovered
overlying the fifth and sixth cervical vertebrae. The
turned button measured 8mm and appeared to have
had an offset rim (Figure178). The lack of any metallic shanks from the burial or any evidence of metallic
staining on the bone button indicates this was a cloth
or thread-covered fastener, probably attached with a
thread shank.
Burial 243: Burial243 was a Late Group, coffinless interment of a man between 40 and 50years of
age. A single button (Figure179) was recovered from
beneath the upper part of the mans skull. The copperalloy button (Catalog No.1230-B.001) was cast, with
an applied shank, and measured 27mm in diameter.
The loop portion of the shank was missing. Although
the button was heavily corroded and fragmentary,
there was a hint of a raised, annular edge decora-
tion. Based on the location of the item, the relation

of this burial to other grave cuts, and the presence
in the grave shaft of household and industrial waste
material, including glassware, ceramics, tannery and
slaughterhouse debris, the artifact was probably the
result of secondary deposition.
Burial 250: Burial 250, an Early Group interment, held an adult of undetermined sex and age. A
copper-alloy button (Catalog No.1239-B.001) and
a small iron mass (Catalog No.1239-B.003) with a
large black glass bead (No.1239-B.004, described in
Chapter13) were found in the central portion of the
coffin interior, possibly near the pelvis. The copperalloy button (Figure180) measured 20mm in diameter
and had a braised shank, although the loop portion
of the shank was missing. With the exception of a
small raised nipple centered on the face, the button
was undecorated. Another item, originally identified
by conservators as a highly degraded pewter button,
was subsequently identified as a tack associated with
the iron and glass object. Field recording was minimal
for this burial; the precise location of the button and
its association with possible clothing is impossible to
reconstruct. Although the button may have fastened
a burial garment, the apparent juxtaposition of the
objects in this burial suggests a possible alternative
function, such as a memento or talisman.
Burial 257: Burial257 held a man between 30 and
40years old who has been assigned to the Late Group.
Two whole bone buttons were found in the process of
screening the grave fill. Field notes state that one of
the buttons was originally located in the sacrum area.
A portion of a third bone button was recovered in the
laboratory during the cleaning of the left acetabulum
(hip joint). The two whole buttons (Catalog No.1246-
Figure 181. Bone buttons from Burial 257: left, fragment (Catalog
No. 1246-B.002); right, two whole buttons (Catalog No. 1246B.001). Diameters are 1213 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
B.001) and the portion of the third button (Catalog

No.1246-B.002) are shown in Figure181.
All three buttons were cut from animal bone and
measured between 12 and 13mm in diameter, with
worn or minimal turning marks and no evidence
of an offset rim. The lack of offset rims and metal
components, such as shanks or caps, or any evidence
of metallic staining on the bone, suggest that these
buttons were cloth- or thread-covered with thread
shanks. It is also possible they were button backs
that were never made into buttons or that the shanks
and covers had been removed. The buttons may have
fastened undergarments, but the lack of good provenience information precludes assignment to particular
garments or speculation about other ways the items
may have been used (such as strung).
Burial 259: Burial259 was a Late Group interment
of a 1719year old identified as a probable woman.
Eighteen buttons or parts of buttons were recorded
Figure 182. In situ drawing of Burial 259 showing button locations.

Scale is 1 inch = 1 foot (drawing by M. Schur).
in situ with the skeletal remains (Figure182). There

were four buttons with an identical face design aligned
along the end of each femur, just above the knees,
and three more of the same buttons were found in the
pelvic area (Catalog Nos.1249-B.009, 1249-B.010,
1249-B.013 [which includes two specimens], 1249B.017, and 1249-B.0191249-B.023).
Figure 183. Copper-alloy buttons, with parallel ridged and

milled decoration, from Burial 259: top row, Catalog Nos.
1249-B.009, 1249-B.010, and 1249-B.013; middle row,
Catalog Nos. 1249-B.017, 1249-B.019, and 1249-B.020;
bottom row, Catalog Nos. 1249-B.021, 1249-B.022, and
1249-B.023. One additional specimen (Catalog No. 1249B.005) is not pictured. Diameter is 18 mm (photograph by
Jon Abbott).
Figure 184. Tin-plated, copper-alloy button from Burial 259

Abbott).

1249-B.010); photograph shows boss and wire loop shank. Total
boss/shank length is 8 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Two smooth-faced buttons and a button shank

were also found on the ribs (Catalog Nos.1249-B.11
and 1249-B.12). Three more button shanks were
recorded on the vertebrae and two on the pelvis (Catalog No.1249-B.016).
The button locations at the hips and knees indicate
the individual was buried wearing breeches. The two
buttons on the ribs may have been from a shirt.
Ten of the copper alloy breeches buttons are shown
in Figure183. The ones that had been lying facedown
on the coffin floor (all on the left side of the body;
see Figure182) had wood adhering to their faces. The
buttons measured 18mm in diameter and were of cast
copper alloy, with a parallel, ridged decoration with
milled impressions. The buttons were subsequently
spun and finished with tin plate (Figure184). The
copper alloy wire shanks were cast in a high cone
shaped boss (Figure185).
Portions of two of the buttons on the ribs, identified
as metal in the field, were recovered and subsequently
were identified by project conservators as leather with
woolen fibers adhering. They were apparently made of

wood, possibly with leather covers (Figure186). The
five copper-alloy shanks recorded separately in the
field represent five additional buttons, which also may
have been made of wood that did not survive. Based on
the shank morphology, the ends would have extended
through the button and were crimped or tied off with
a wire to create a flange, so as not to pull through the
button face (Figure187; also see Burials203 and 379
for comparative examples).
Woven textile fragments and leather adhered to several buttons and to the coffin wood where buttons had
lain against the bottom board (Figures188 and189).
Several of the textile fragments were not identified,
but those associated with the breeches buttons were
of wool. There were also fragments of linen, labeled
as from buttons (Catalog No.1249-B.003), but
conservators did not record which buttons they were
associated with.
Burial 271: Burial271 was assigned to the Middle
Group. It held a man between 45 and 57years old who
Figure 186. Possible leather-covered wood buttons from

Burial 259 (Catalog Nos. 1249-B.011 and 1249-B.012).
Figure 187. Copper-alloy button shanks from Burial

259 (Catalog No. 1249-B.016). Length is 10 mm
Figure 188. Textile from Burial 259, retrieved from coffin wood
sample (Catalog No. 1249-CWB) (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 189. Copper-alloy button and wool textile from Burial 259 (Catalog No. 1249-B.017). The button was removed from associated
cloth to show the buttonhole, which did not appear to have been top stitched (compare to the example from Burial 415). The ruler at
right is measured in millimeters (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 190. Bone button, with offset rim, from Burial 313 (Catalog No.
1516-B.001 [1 of 2]). Diameter is 22 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
was interred in a coffin with a hexagonal shape. Two

copper-alloy domed buttons, each with an outside
diameter of 14mm, were recovered from the screen
during excavation. The first button was of one-piece,
solid-cast construction with a high shank (Catalog
No.1267-UNC.001). The second button consisted of
small fragments of the dome, which appeared to have
been decorated, and a portion of the shank (Catalog
No.1267-UNC.002). Because the items were found
in the screen, it is impossible to state whether, or
how, they were directly associated with the mans
remains.
Burial 276: Burial276 was a Late Group, coffinless internment of a woman between 20 and 24years
of age. Although no artifacts were directly associated
with the individual, the grave shaft contained a relatively heavy secondary deposit of industrial waste
from nearby tanneries/slaughterhouses and ceramic
manufacturers. Also in the grave shaft were faunal
remains, personal items, and domestic ceramics and
glassware from the second and early part of the third
quarter of the eighteenth century. The field notes
referred to a possible coin recovered from slightly
above the body, near the womans right rib cage. Upon
closer inspection, however, this item was identified as
a button (Catalog No.1273-UNC.001). It was of cast
copper-alloy and measured 20mm in diameter, with a
curved face and an applied loop shank. The conservators treated seven fragments from the buttons face,
some of which were gilded. The button did not appear
to have functioned as a clothes fastener or to have been
deliberately placed with the woman but was present
in the graves back fill owing to redeposition.
Burial 278: This Late Group, coffinless interment
held a man between 45 and 55years old. The association of this burial with a cast copper-alloy button
was problematic. The button was cataloged in the
laboratory, but its provenience was not recorded in
the field. Although there were no artifacts directly
associated with this individual, the grave shaft contained a secondary deposit of material including faunal
remains, personal items, and domestic ceramics from
the second and early part of the third quarter of the
eighteenth century.
The button (Catalog No.1275-UNC.001) was a
cast, copper-alloy disk that measured 16mm in diameter. It had a slightly curved face and an applied loop
shank. The majority of the shank was missing. The
conservators notes stated that the back of the button
exhibited gold plating and was associated with fabric.
No cloth fragments were in the collection handled by
the Howard University Archaeology Team.
Burial 313: Three buttons manufactured from
animal bone and another possible one represented
by a small copper-alloy ring were recovered about
the body and within the coffin of Burial313, a Late
old. The three bone buttons, each with a single,
central drilled hole, were found lying on the coffin
bottom at the top of the mans head. Two measured
22mm in diameter (Catalog No.1516-B.001; Figure190), and a third (Catalog No.1516-B.002; Figure191) measured 13mm in diameter. The smaller
example was identical in manufacture to the two
larger buttons. Turning or cut marks were visible on
both sides of each button. One of the larger specimens
had a narrow offset rim, but the rim was not as well
manufactured as the examples of this type found
Figure 192. Copper-alloy button and shank fragments from Burial

Jon Abbott).
with Burial181.
The absence of metal shanks or any evidence of
staining on these bone buttons indicate that they were
covered with cloth or thread and probably attached with
a thread shank. It is also possible these buttons were
originally button backs that were modified or reused.
The copper-alloy items (not photographed) identified as fragments of a possible button ring were initially cataloged as three curved straight pin fragments.
They were found during laboratory cleaning of skeletal
remains, in soil among the left ribs.
The location of the bone buttons near the top of the
cranium suggests that they did not function as clothing
fasteners. There is no way to know whether the possible button ring represented a clothing fastener.
Burial 325: A single copper-alloy button was
found on the left upper sacrum of Burial325, a Late
old. The buttons copper-alloy loop shank was found
in two pieces on the lower right sacrum. Both the
button disk and the two shank fragments were designated Catalog No.1577-B.001. The cast button
measured 22mm in diameter. It is possible that the
face was decorated with a bust or human figure in
portrait (Figure192). The face was gilded, and the
back was spun flat, with a braised loop shank. Field
records indicate that unidentified organic material was
associated with the objects, but none of the material
was recovered.
Burial 326: Four buttons (Catalog Nos.1584-B.001
1584-B.003 and .006) were recorded in association with
Burial326, a Middle Group interment of a man between
45 and 55years old. (In addition to the buttons, three
lead buckshot [3-mm size] were recovered in association with the mans remains.) All of the buttons were
made of copper alloy with a cast, hollow-domed construction. Two measured 19mm in diameter (Catalog
Nos.1584-B.001 and 1584-B.002; Figures193 and 194)
and the other two, 23mm (Catalog Nos.1584-B.003
and 1584-B.006). They were all found in the pelvic area
and between the tops of the femurs, near the hands. The
larger pair was poorly preserved but appeared to have
Figure 193. Copper-alloy button, with cast hollow-dome, from Burial 326 (Catalog No. 1584-B.001): (a) face; (b)
back. Diameter is 19 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 194. Back of copper-alloy button, with hollow-dome,

from Burial 326 (Catalog No. 1584-B.002). Diameter is 19 mm
Figure 195. Face of cast-copper-alloy button from Burial 326 (Catalog

No. 1584-B.006). Mended diameter is 23 mm (photograph by Jon
Abbott).
been ovoid in shape. The button locations suggest either

trousers or sleeve links.
On the best-preserved item, one of the two 19-mm
buttons, the loop shank was of drawn wire manufacture and was braised on the buttons back (see
Figure194).
Items 1584-B.003 and 1584-B.006 consisted of
three fragments from two apparently oval, cast copperalloy buttons (Figure195). The items were manufactured in at least two parts and were domed. No
decoration was apparent on any of the pieces. It was
not possible to determine the manner in which the
shanks had been attached. The pieces from Catalog
No.1584-B.006 had undergone mending by conservators in the lab but were separated at the time of the
final inventory.
Field records state that a small fragment of cloth
as well as a bit of possible hair had adhered to
one of buttons. A small fragment of organic material was cataloged (Catalog No. 1584-B.009; not
photographed) but was not identifiable. Finally, an
intrusive, steel ball bearing (1-mm diameter) was
recovered.
Burial 333: Six bone button disks were found in
association with Burial333, a Late-Middle Group
interment of a man between 45 and 55years old. The
disks were positioned on and around the pelvic region.
Three had outside diameters of 11mm, two of 13mm,
and one of 20mm (Figure196). (The original catalog
listed four at 13mm and one at 11mm.) The center
holes measured 23mm in diameter.
All of the buttons had been cut from animal bone
and had a center-drilled hole and worn or minimal
evidence of turning marks on one or both sides. A
possible narrow offset rim was present on one of the
smaller buttons (Figure197). The edge, however,
Figure 196. Bone buttons from Burial 333: top left,

Catalog No. 1613-B.001; top right, Catalog No.
1613-B.002; bottom row, Catalog No. 1613-B.003
Figure 198. Copper-alloy cuff links from Burial 341 (Catalog No. 1652-B.001): (a) front; (b) back. Diameter is 18 mm (photograph by Jon
Abbott).
did not follow along the entire circumference of the

button, and it was likely that a fault was introduced
in the cutting of the button blank. The absence of
offset rims and metal components, such as shanks or
caps, or any evidence of metallic staining indicated
the buttons had originally been covered with cloth or
thread and probably had thread shanks.
Burial 341: Burial341, a Middle Group interment, held a man of undetermined age. A pair of cast
copper-alloy cuff links was found on the distal left
radius (Catalog No.1652-B.001). The cuff links had
an octagonal-shaped design, but the flat, possibly
untrimmed crowns appeared circular when viewed from
the back (Figure198). Unlike the octagonal cuff links
from Burial238, these lacked a rear lip, and they were
slightly larger in size. The crowns measured 18mm
across and had cast, flat shanks with hand-drilled eyes.
The copper-alloy wire loops connecting the cuff links
measured approximately 18mm in length.
The faces had identical decorations. Along the outer
edge was a narrow octagonal band decorated with an
egg-and-dart motif or possibly a stylized Tudor Rose.
The central portion of each crown consisted of a circular band with a decoration that repeated the design
of the octagonal band. Within this circular band was
a circular area, apparently stippled.
Burial 342: Burial342, a Late Group burial, held
the remains of a woman 2535years old. A copper-alloy aglet (in two pieces) was identified in the
laboratory (Catalog No.1660-B.001), but its location
within the burial is not known. Two straight pins
were recorded in situ during excavation, one on the
cranium and one on the sacrum, and two pins were
accounted for in the lab. It is possible, however, that
one of the pins identified in the field was actually the
aglet. No decoration was visible on either of the fragments. However, as is evident from the photograph in
Figure199, the object was constructed of rolled sheet
metal and the ends of the tube were slightly wider
than the midsection.
Burial 353: Burial353, a Middle Group interment,
held the remains of a man between 24 and 34years
old. Fragments of a turned bone button were recorded
in situ next to the left sciatic notch. Owing to wear
Figure 199. Copper-alloy aglet from Burial 342 (Catalog No.

1660-B.0012). Scale is in 0.5 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 200. Copper-alloy button, with applied loop shank, from Burial 366 (Catalog No. 1830-B.001): (a) face; (b) side view with shank.
and/or corrosion, the exact diameter of the button

(Catalog No.1723-B.003) could not be determined.
The button had a single, centrally located, drilled hole.
The lack of any metal shanks in the burial or evidence
of metallic staining on the button indicates it was a
cloth- or thread-covered fastener, probably attached
with a thread shank.
Burial 361: Burial361 was an Early Group interment of man between 33 and 57years old. A pewter
button was recovered with this burial, from just
above the right scapula/humerus. It was given a
number in the field (361.1) and was cataloged when
first accessioned in the laboratory but subsequently
was noted as missing. The item was never located
or examined by the Howard University Archaeology Team.
Burial 366: Burial366 was a Middle Group interment of an adult between 34 and 62years of age
whose sex could not be determined. The deceased had
been buried with the hands over the upper thighs. A
single one-piece button was recorded in situ on the

right wrist (Catalog No.1830-B.001). It was 20mm
in diameter, of copper alloy and had an applied alpha
loop shank (Figure200). A narrow, plain band along
approximately 50percent of the buttons preserved
edge may have been decorative or may have been
untrimmed excess from the casting process.
Burial 368: Burial368, which held a child 10.5
13.5years old whose burial was assigned to the Middle
Group, was found with a small (11mm diameter)
ring (Catalog No.1868-B.001) just below the chin,
at the throat (Figure201). This item was tentatively
identified as part of a fastening of some kind or a
grommet. It was of sheet-copper alloy that had been
rolled over.
Burial 371: Burial371 has been assigned to the
Middle Group. It held the remains of a woman between
25 and 35years of age who was interred without
a coffin. Two button or cuff-link faces of copper
alloy decorated with enamel (a turquoise background
Figure 202. Iron button with associated textile fragment from

Burial 371 (Catalog No. 1875-B.002). Diameter is 12 mm
Figure 201. Possible grommet made of copper

alloy (in situ) from Burial 368 (Catalog No. 1868B.001). Diameter is 11 mm (photograph by
Dennis Seckler).
and white-and-pink surface decoration) were found

beneath her left humerus. The items, which we categorize as adornment rather than clothing fasteners,
are described and illustrated in Chapter13.
A metal button was also recovered from Burial371,
but its location within the grave was not noted in the
field records. The domed, stamped, circular iron disk
(Catalog No.1875-B.002) was 12mm in diameter
and had a 2-mm central hole (Figure202). A small
fragment (broken into pieces) of rust-encrusted textile,
identified as wool with an undeterminable weave,
was found adhering to the button face. The button
(possibly used for upholstery) is evidently lacking the
pin shank and appears to be of a type manufactured
in the second quarter of the nineteenth century (Nol
Hume 1969:9091). Based on the lack of provenience
and the high degree of disturbance to Burial371, the
button is considered to have been intrusive.
Burial 379: Burial379, which held a man between
30 and 40years old, was also assigned to the Middle
Group. Field notes stated that following the removal
of skeletal remains, a bone button with a copper-alloy
shank was found below the distal end of the left ulna.
The item (Catalog No.1906-B.001) was subsequently
identified in the laboratory as a leather button, possibly
a backing (not photographed). Based on comparable
items from Burial259, the preserved remains may
have been the leather covering or the outer portion

of a wood button with a copper-alloy loop shank. The
shank (Catalog No.1906-B.002) was well preserved
(Figure203). It was made of copper-alloy wire, which
was then shaped by hand. The inside surface of the
loop had been flattened, as had the joined ends. The
ends of the 10-mm-long shank, which would have
extended through the button disc, are slightly wider
than the shaft and may have been hand crimped or
possibly wound with wire to create a flange that fastened the shank.
A second button (Catalog No.1906-B.003), of
entirely different manufacture, was found during
laboratory cleaning of the right innominate. It was
an undecorated, two-piece, copper-alloy domed button with a soldered loop shank extending through
the back of the button. The front face of the button
measured 17mm in diameter (Figure204). Most of
the back portion of the button was not preserved, but
conservators treated the loop shank. The ends of the
wire shank, attached before the front and back button
sections were joined, were splayed outward.
Burial 385: Burial385, a Middle Group interment
of a 4060-year-old woman, had two tiny bone buttons. One came from the coffin floor between the right
first rib and third thoracic vertebra, and the other came
from loose sand examined after removal of the right
ribs. The buttons (both Catalog No.1964-B.001) were
of turned bone and measured approximately 8mm
in diameter. Each of the buttons had a single drilled
hole with very little evidence of turning on either side
(Figure205). The lack of offset rims and metallic components, such as shanks or caps, or any evidence of
metallic staining indicates they were probably cloth- or
thread-covered fasteners attached with a thread shank.
Figure 203. Copper-alloy loop shank from Burial 379 (Catalog No. 1906B.002). Length is 10 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Such buttons are typical of undergarments. As noted

for previously described burials, it is also possible
these buttons were originally button backs that were
modified or reused, either by the removal of the metal
cap or by reusing a button that lost its shank.
Burial 387: Burial387 was an Early Group burial
of a man between 34 and 44years of age. A fragment
of a cast copper-alloy cuff link or button was recorded
in the laboratory from an unknown provenience within
this grave. It was not photographed and was not recovered after the collapse of the World Trade Center. The
item cannot be associated definitively with the remains
in Burial387, owing to the lack of field provenience
and possible mixing from Burial366. Excessive corrosion made it impossible to obtain the items overall
dimensions or observe manufacturing details.
Burial 392: Eleven buttons, some in fragments,
were recorded in situ with Burial392, a Late-Middle
of age who was buried with his head to the east in a
rectangular coffin (Figure206). Four well-preserved
bone-button backs, with associated cloth, were found
adjacent to the outside of the right knee (all Catalog
Nos.2039-B.002; Figure207), and three that were
poorly preserved were found on or under the left
knee (Catalog Nos.2039-B.005 [Figure208], 2039B.006, and 2039-B.008 [Figure209). Another three
were located adjacent to the right hand: two buttons
assigned Catalog No.2039-B.010 (Figures210 and
211) and Catalog No.2039-B.011, and one more was
found near the left hand (Catalog No.2039-B.009;
Figure212). The button backs from the right hand
were 2.12.2cm in diameter, and the others examples
measured 1.51.6cm. One octagonal copper-alloy
cuff-link face (Catalog No.2039-B.004) was recov-
Figure 204. Copper-alloy dome button from Burial 379 (Catalog No.
Figure 205. Bone buttons from Burial 385 (Catalog No. 1964-B.001).
Diameter is 8 mm (whole specimen) (photograph by Jon Abbott).
ered from the right clavicle, and a highly degraded portion of a second face was found in the laboratory when
the cervical vertebrae were cleaned (not shown).
The locations of the bone-button backs suggest the
deceased was laid to rest in pants or breeches, and
the possible links at the shoulder may have fastened
a shirt at the neck.
The bone disks were cut and turned, and each
had four drilled sew-through holes. A slight central
indentation on each was probably the result of the
manufacturing process. There was a slight variation in
the location of the drilled holes. In the best-preserved
examples, the backs had a slight convex dome with
a narrow offset rim; the front faces were concave to
allow space for threading. The presence of a slight
greenish tinge on some of the examples (see Figure207), possibly metallic staining, suggests that they
may once have had metal caps. No metal components,
such as caps, were preserved, nor were any fragmentary remains noted in the field records.
Figure 206. Detail of Burial 392 with buttons at

knees and hips. North is to the right, as is the
convention throughout this report. This burial
was oriented atypically, with the head to the east.
Scale is 1 inch = 1 foot (in situ drawing by M.
Schur).
Figure 207. Bone buttons from

Burial 392 (Catalog No. 2039-B.002).
Diameter is 16 mm (photograph by
Jon Abbott). Selected for replication.
Fragments of fine wool were recovered in association with the bone button backs. One from a button at
the right knee included a well-preserved buttonhole
(Catalog No.2039-B.001) (Figure213). The buttonhole, which measured approximately 1mm wider
than the buttons, does not appear to have been edged
or finished with thread (for an example of a finished
buttonhole, see Burial415). The project conservators
recognized that the fiber had an S-twist.
The cast copper-alloy cuff-link face (Figure214)
found at the right shoulder appears to have had loop
shank that was cast in place. The cuff links face
measured 16mm in diameter and appears to have had

an impressed, centrally placed decoration. A narrow,
undecorated band was evident along the edge of the
preserved portion of the cuff link. Most of the shank
was missing, as was the link. The cuff link may have
been used as the top button on a shirt.
Burial 398: Burial398 consisted of redeposited human remains from an adult between 25 and
35years of age. Among other items, including nails,
nail fragments, straight-pin fragments, and a ring,
was a portion of a button or cuff link. Another button, found to the north of the main concentration of
Figure 210. Bone button from Burial 392 (Catalog No. 2039-B.010
[one of two]). Diameter is 21 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 211. Mended bone button from Burial 392 (Catalog No. 2039B.010 [one of two]). Diameter is 21 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 213. Wool buttonhole from Burial 392 (Catalog No. 2039B.001). Width is 33 mm; buttonhole is 17 mm (photograph by Jon
Abbott).
Figure 214. Copper-alloy cuff link from Burial 392 (Catalog No.
Figure 215. Copper-alloy button or cuff link from Burial 398

(Catalog No. 2061-B.003). It is 12 mm at widest part (photograph
by Jon Abbott).
Figure 216. Pewter button from Burial 403 (Catalog No. 2067-B.001 [one of two]): (a) front; (b) side view. Diameter is 23 mm
bone, was noted and mapped but was cataloged with

Burial403.
The copper-alloy cuff link (Catalog No. 2061B.003) had an octagonal-shaped face with a cast
design consisting of a series of circular impressions,
possibly stars, within narrow octagonal bands around
a circular central decoration. Additional fragments
included portions of a copper-alloy-wire link and possibly the remains of a loop shank (Figure215).
Burial 403: The remains in Burial403, from a
man between 39 and 65years old, were fragmentary
and damaged as a result of construction activity at
the site during the field program. Items recovered
with this interment were scattered among the skeletal
remains, and it is not clear whether the items were
in direct association with the deceased. Two buttons
were photographed and drawn in situ before being
collected in the field, but three buttons were mentioned
in the field notes. Later, four buttons were cataloged
in the laboratory. It is likely the fourth button was
one that was noted in the field records for Burial398

(see above).
Two of the buttons were of pewter with a high tin
and lead content. They were of cast construction, had
applied loop shanks, and measured 23mm in diameter
(Catalog No.2067-B.001; Figure216).
A third button (Catalog No.2067-B.002) was plain,
of cast copper alloy with a flat face and a loop shank
set in a low boss, 22mm in diameter. The back of
the button appears to have been spun (Figure217).
The fourth button (Catalog No.2067-B.003) was an
undecorated, copper-alloy cast, domed type of twopiece construction with a brazed shank and soldered
seams; it measured 17mm in diameter (Figure218).
This buttons back had two small holes and appeared
to have been gilded.
In addition to the buttons, fragments of black cloth
with a simple weave were recovered, although it is not
clear whether these were associated with particular
buttons (Catalog No.2067-B.004; Figure219).
Figure 217. Copper-alloy button from Burial 403 (Catalog No. 2067-B.002): (a) front; (b) back. Diameter is 22 mm (photograph by Jon
Abbott).
Figure 218. Cast 2-piece copper-alloy button from Burial 403 (Catalog No. 2067-B.003): (a) front; (b) back. Diameter is 17 mm
No.2071-B.001). The face measured 30mm in diameter (Figure220). The placement and size of the button
suggest it did not function as a fastener for clothing. It
may have been a talisman or item of adornment that
Figure 219. Textile from Burial 403 (Catalog No. 2067-B.004). Scale
is in 0.5 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Burial 405: Burial405 held the remains of a 610year-old child. A single button was recorded in situ
below the right wrist and was identified in the laboratory as a Brittania large button made of spun white
metal with an applied copper-alloy loop shank (Catalog
Figure 220. Spun-white-metal Brittania button with copper-alloy

shank from Burial 405 (Catalog No. 2071-B.001). Diameter is 30
mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 221. Detail of Burial 415 drawing,

buttons at knees and hips. Scale is 1 inch =
1 foot (in situ drawing by M. Schur).
was perhaps worn on a string or as a bracelet or may

have been placed in the hand of the deceased.
Burial 415: The 3555-year-old man in Burial415,
a Middle Group interment, was buried wearing knee
breeches, possibly of woolen cloth, and apparently
with a fall or drop flap in front. The field drawing of
the remains showed 14buttons in locations consistent
with breeches of this style: 4 over the left knee, 4 outside the right knee, 2 above and on the proximal left
femur, and 2 above and on the proximal right femur
(Figure221). Two additional buttons were noted as
located beneath the sacrum. There is, however, a
discrepancy between the field count of 14 and the
number of buttons (13) that were inventoried in the
lab. It is likely the field number was inaccurate owing
to a button having been broken and counted as 2.
Although each button was labeled and its exact
location (and the elevation of selected items) recorded
in the field, this information did not follow individual
pieces through the laboratory conservation process,
and there is no way now to know with certainty what
buttons, which were not of identical manufacture and
size, were at each location on the body.
Ten of the buttons (all Catalog No.2097-B.004)
were hollow cast and measured 17mm in diameter
(Figure222). Two holes were present in backs (from
which heated gases could escape during manufacture).
The face and back of each button were joined, and the
buttons had a hollow center and a separate wire loop
shank that was braised to the back. Remnants of the
gilding process were observed on some of the buttons,
but no other decoration was apparent.
The three remaining buttons were of similar manufacture but lacked the back holes. Two (both Catalog
No.2097-B.006) measured 23.5mm in diameter
(Figures223 and 224). One of these was broken, and
may account for the fourteenth button mentioned in
the field records. The final button inventoried (Catalog
No.2097-B.003) measured 18mm (Figure225). It had
a remnant identified by conservators as leather adhering to the back, and a fabric fragment was also processed in association with the button (Figure226).
Wool cloth (Catalog No.2097-B.005) was recovered with one of the buttons, but owing to a laboratory
processing error it is not now possible to determine
to which specific button it belonged. The cloth was in
two layers, one to which the button attached and one
containing a sewn finished buttonhole (Figure227
has a detail of the buttonhole).
Another fragment of textile was recovered adhering to coffin wood (Figure228). This may also have
been from clothing, although the presence of a shroud
cannot be ruled out (there were pin fragments found
at the cranium).
Figure 222. Copper-alloy buttons from Burial 415

(Catalog No. 2097-B.004): (a) front; (b) back.
Figure 223. Copper-alloy button from Burial 415 (Catalog No. 2097B.006 [one of two]). Diameter is 23.5 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).

2097-B.006 [one of two]). Diameter is 23.5 mm (photograph by
Jon Abbott).
Figure 225. Copper-alloy button, with leather, from Burial

415 (Catalog No. 2097-B.003): (a) front; (b) back. Diameter
is 18 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 226. Textile from Burial 415 (Catalog No. 2097B.007). Scale is in 0.5 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 227. Wool textile from Burial 415 (Catalog No. 2097-B.005): (a) left, fabric to which button was sewn; right, fabric with
buttonhole (width is 21 mm); (b) detail of buttonhole finished with lighter-colored thread (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 228. Wool textile from Burial 415 (Catalog

No. 2097-B.005). Width of fragment is 17 mm
Chapter 13
Beads and Other Adornment

Barbara A. Bianco, Christopher R. DeCorse, and Jean Howson
In this chapter we take the measure of the beads and

other personal adornment recovered in association
with skeletal remains. We begin with a profile of the
burials with adornment and then consider where and
how the items were acquired. Each of the assemblages
inventoried in the chapterbeads, cowries, rings and
other jewelryis then described in detail. Information
is provided about recovery, condition and treatment,
chain of custody, methods of analysis, and where
relevant, descriptive typologies and findings about
manufacture, origin, and age.
A Profile of Burials with Personal

Adornment
With the exception of a handful of cowries and a
piece of amber, the adornment from the New York
African Burial Ground consisted of factory-made
goods. The beads, buttons, cuff links, finger rings, and
other ornaments found with the deceased would have
been priced modestly in their day. The prominence
of copper alloy and simple monochrome glass places
the assemblages at the lower end of the ready-to-wear
jewelry market. Business in this sector was brisk when
the African Burial Ground was open: the supply of
inexpensive jewelry increased in volume and variety in
every major colonial American city during the 1700s,
as did the supply of jewelry crafted with precious
metals and stones (see Fales 1995:6378). London
imports and locally made merchandise were advertised
in the weekly press, typically with the enthusiastic
but perfunctory prose Manhattan silversmith Daniel
Fueter used: Articles too numerous to mention, all
extremely Cheap (New-York Gazette, or, the Weekly
Post-Boy, March 10, 1763; for Manhattan jewelry
advertisements, see Gottesman [1938:2983]).
Very little of this ever-expanding stock in trade

found its way to the graves of Manhattans African
workers. Adults were interred with personal adornment during all periods of the New York African
Burial Grounds archaeologically documented use,
as were infants and young children. Still, burials with
adornment are uncommonthey are the anomaly, not
the norm. Only 25individuals, some 6.7percent of
the excavated burials, were directly associated with
adornment.1 Among them were 2infants, 2young
children, 9women, 11men, and 1probable adult of
undetermined sex and age. Another 5individuals had
tenuous links to adornment. Table53 summarizes the
particulars; problematic cases are noted in the table.
It may seem unusual that so few of the dead were
adorned when many of the living seem to have embellished themselves in small but memorable ways. Historians who have studied fugitive slave advertisements
published during the eighteenth century call attention
to scores of city dwellers accessorized with panache.
Earrings, bracelets, and buckles added a finishing
touch to the clothing Africans wore in Manhattan,
Philadelphia, and Charleston; buttons gussied up
hats. Hair, perhaps the most personal and distinctive
adornment of all, was sculpted, plaited, tufted, and
queued. Less frequently noted, but not out of place in
an era of peruke-wearing men, were wigs and toupees
(Smith and Wojtowicz 1989; White 1991:185206;
White and White 1995b; Windley 1983).
Yet whether adornment was more widespread
among the living than among the dead is unclear.
Mentioned in the advertisements are items that would
not have survived at the New York African Burial
Ground, including handkerchiefs, ribbons, lacing, and
The total used here is 376 burials, a count that includes burials
for which, at a minimum, the presence/absence of a coffin and in
situ skeletal remains could be determined clearly. The most highly
disturbed burials are not included.
1
322 Barbara A. Bianco, Christopher R. DeCorse, and Jean Howson

Table 53. Burials with Personal Adornment
Temporal
Group
Burial
No.
Age
(years)
Sex
2530
male?
Late
10
4045
male
LateMiddle
71
2535
female
Late
ring
107
3540
female
LateMiddle
1 bead
115
2535
female
Middle
Items
Location in Grave
8 buttons (5 copper alloy,

2 with anchor motif;
portions of 3 pewter)
4 copper alloy along torso, 1 at sacrum; pewter at sacrum
1 on torso, 1 on right foot; shanks at
(8 whole, 5 with shanks only) lower right leg
ring
on third finger of right hand

found during laboratory cleaning of
cranium, near ear
on the third finger of the left hand
158
2030
male
Late
2 pairs gilt copper-alloy cuff at wrists

links, round shape
181
2023
male
Late
7 buttons (3 copper alloy, 6 buttons on pelvic area, 1 found

4 copper alloy and bone with during skeletal cleaning; cuff links
impressed design); cuff links not provenienced
(missing from lab)
186
00.17
undetermined
Late
glass-and-wire ornament
187
1.54
undetermined
Late
22 beads?
211
adult
male?
Late
1 turquoise enamel cuff

link face
226
00.17
undetermined
Early
8 beads
c
238
4050
male
LateMiddle
2 pairs octagonal-shaped
242
4050
female
Late
paste ring
250
adult
undetermined
Early
1 bead
254
3.55.5
Middle
cast silver pendant
259
1719
female?
Late
310
4452
female
Middle
paste ring
325
2535
male
Late
1 gilt copper-alloy button
326
4555
male
Middle
340
39.364.4
female
Early
112 beads strung with

7 cowries
341
adult
male
Middle
1 pair c octagonal-shaped
on the cranium
12 found beneath pelvic area, 10
while screening soil
on the right clavicle, adjacent to the
chin
at throat (beneath mandible)
at wrists
on the middle finger of the right hand
central part of coffin interior,
possibly near pelvis
found during laboratory cleaning
below mandible
18 buttons (11 copper alloy, 4 copper alloy at each knee, 3 in

2 wood, 5 shanks)
pelvic area; 2 wood at ribs; 5 shanks
on vertebrae and pelvis
found during laboratory cleaning of
left hand
left upper sacrum
4 copper-alloy domed buttons in pelvic area and between tops of

femurs, near the hands
around hips and right wrist
at left radius
Chapter 13 . Beads and O ther Adornment 323

Table 53. Burials with Personal Adornment (continued)
Burial
No.
Age
(years)
Sex
Temporal
Group
371
2535
female
Middle
377
3358
female
LateMiddle
392
42.552.5
male
LateMiddle
2 octagonal copper-alloy cuff 1 at right clavicle, 1 at cervical

link faces
vertebrae
415
3555
male
Middle
13 copper-alloy domed
4 at each knee, 2 at each upper femur,
buttons (14 recorded in field) 2 at sacrum
Location in Grave
Items
2 turquoise-enamel cuff link beneath the left humerus

faces with motif
3 copper-alloy rings
(missing from lab)
at throat

332
3540
male?
LateMiddle
387
3444
male
Early
398
2535
undetermined
Middle
1 octagonal cuff link face;

1 ring
428
4070
female
Middle
2 beads
unknownfound during screening of

grave fill soil
Middle
1 bead
found in soil to west of bones
434 undetermined undetermined
curved copper-alloy object found during laboratory cleaning; at(possible earring)

tached to coffin wood near thoracic
vertebrae
cuff link or button fragment provenience unknown
in disturbed depositassociation
with burial unclear

c
A pair of cuff linkstwo faces (or crowns) linked togetherfasten a sleeve. One cuff link (a single face) is
insufficient. A properly fastened shirt would have needed a set of cuff linkstwo matched pairs, one pair per sleeve.
b
fabric bands. The disparity is formidable. Roughly a

third of the adornment recorded in the list of Africans
who escaped from New York City households between
1732 and 1783 (see Table50, Chapter 12) was made
with perishable material, and rarely did a person have
adornment of more than one type.2
Missing from the advertisements, however, are the
adornment worlds of the very young and the middle
aged. Africans who fled from Manhattan households
typically were in their late teens and their twenNone of the women did. Seven of the 10adornment-wearing women
listed in Table50 (see Chapter 12) had perishable only items, as did
10 of the 42adornment-wearing men. Three women and 25men had
durable only adornment. Seven men had a mix of durable and perishable
goods. Not all advertisements included descriptions of the clothing and
jewelry that black city residents wore and took with them when they
fled from bondage. Table50 is limited to advertisements that describe
clothing and jewelry. It thus represents a subset of the advertisements
published in eighteenth-century New York newspapers.
2
ties (White 1991:122124), a pattern illustrated in

Table50 (see Chapter 12). Only 3 of the 205entries
feature infants and young children: an 8-month-old
child and its mother escaped in the autumn of 1759; a
56-year-old girl headed into the citys Revolutionary
Wartorn streets in August 1783, as did a little boy.
The little boys fustian trousers had buttons all down
the sides, but neither the infant nor the girl appears to
have had an adornment to their names. The upper end
of the life cycle is better represented than the lower
end but not appreciably so. Decorations are scarce in
this cohort as well: just one of the eight adults with
about 40 or more years of age had adornment, a man
named Tom who escaped in 1776 wearing new shoes
fastened with buckles. Most of the individuals listed
in the roster had no adornment of any kind and thus
were not unlike their deceased neighbors and kin.
Even so, there is little reason to suppose that burials
with adornment held people who were more beloved

or better off economically than their contemporaries.
It is true that the African Burial Ground served many
people for whom the cost of small luxuries was dear.3
It is also true that the possessions of the poor seldom
stayed in place for long. Objects owned by the poor
[migrate] under the pressure of debt (Stallybrass
1998:196199). In colonial Manhattans African community, adornment migrated for still another reason:
individuals on the run reconfigured their accessories
for expediency and disguise. Pompey no longer had
earrings when he fled from bondage in 1763; Claus
absconded in 1757 with a bundle of things, including
a flowered stuff waistcoat lined with shalloon and
likely fastened with decorative buttons (see Table 50,
Chapter 12). But the wearing of personal adornment
is a matter of inclination as well as circumstance.
Not everyone chooses to wear adornment, even in
communities where people and possessions are less
likely to roam.
The types of adornment from the burial ground
were narrow in range. For instance, decorations for the
feet come up short when the cemetery population is
compared to the African public at large. By the 1750s
Africans in colonial Manhattan were wearing shoes
fastened with buckles of brass, silver, steel, pewter, and
stone, a reference to crystal, or perhaps to paste, metal
jewelry with glass insets held by a bezel, in the form
of a groove or a flange. Bits of leather and fragments
of metal that hint of footwear were not recovered in
the field or the laboratory. The reasonable inference is
that shoes were held back from the grave.
Decorations for the head come up short too, but
headwear typically took the form of perishable hairstyles and perishable hats with ribbons and bands.
Consequently, neither the decisions nor the decision
makers are etched sharply enough to discern where
community-wide sensibilities bumped up against
individual tastes. Some hairstyles may have harbored
durable items like the glass bead from Burial 107.
Prior to interment, the hair of the deceased may have
been dressed and groomed (for representations of hair
and hats in African art, a key source of knowledge
about African adornment in the past, see Seiber and
Herreman [2000]).
Although the adornment from the cemetery was
not as varied as the adornment seen on Manhattan
Archaeologist BarbaraJ. Heath (1999) has examined how small
luxuries were acquired. Own-account economic activities are
discussed in Historical Perspectives of the African Burial Ground
(Medford, Brown, Carrington, etal. 2009c:6364).
3
streets, its expressive sweep was arguably the same.

If adornment can be likened to a language, a system
of symbolic communication akin to speech, then it
spoke in a babble of tongues during the period that
the African Burial Ground was in use. It conveyed
considerable information as well, from evocations
of a remembered Africa to subtle mockery of European pretensions (see White 1991:196199). This
communicative intricacy reflected the complexity of
the city. Colonial Manhattan was a crossroad on the
commercial map, and its shops and homes had an
international cast. After 1703, newcomers outnumbered the native born, and no particular nationality,
ethnicity, or religion held sway (Butler 2000:9). As the
century progressed, members of the black community
hailed from an ever-widening swath of a continent that
hundreds of African societies called home.
Two notes on terminology may be of help before
moving on to the individual profiles. Button is used
more restrictively than in Chapter12. In this chapter,
the term refers to decorative buttons recovered alone
(Burial325) and en masse (Burials6, 10, 181, 259,
326, and 415). Plain, serviceable buttons may have
spruced up a collar or personalized a cuff, or perhaps
dangled from a string at the neck or the wrist. Burials
with plain buttons are not included in the adornment
profile because any aesthetic value these buttons held
for their wearers is not apparent from the grave.
Second, personal adornment and personal decoration are used interchangeably, although only the
latter was a commonplace phrase 300years ago. Jewelry and ornament stand in as well. The qualifier
personal is sometimes omitted but always implied
because it best describes the domain in which the
items belong. A consideration of the formidable gear
attached to a necklace recovered from another African Diaspora cemetery of the period may clarify
the distinction we seek to make. The necklace from
Burial72 at Newton Plantation, Barbados, held 1large
agate, 7cowries, 14glass beads, 21dog canines, and
5vertebrae from a bony fishan array linked to the
practice of divination (see Handler 1997; Handler and
Lange 1978:125130). There are no counterparts to
that necklace at the New York African Burial Ground
(cf.LaRoche 1994b:12). Adornment worn for personal pleasure is by no means culturally insignificant,
however. As we explain in the discussion that follows
the profiles, the adornments from lower Manhattan
connected their wearers both to the wider African
community and to the constraints and possibilities
of the times.
Infants and Young Children with

Personal Adornment
Eight opaque yellow beads characteristic of African
manufacture were found at the throat of the infant in
Burial226 (Bead Type14; see Figure53 in Chapter
5).4 The infant had its own coffin but shared the grave
of an adult man. The grave is placed in the Early
Group of excavated burials (see Chapter6).
Twenty-two black beads, drawn and cut from glass
made in Europe, encircled the hips of the 1.54-yearold child in Burial187 (Bead Type6). This childs
grave was in the northern part of the cemetery and
is assigned to the Late Group, post 1776. The grave
appears to have been placed next to or between the
graves of adults (see Chapter9).
A cast silver pendant that may have been attached
to a string and worn as a necklace was found with
Burial254, a Middle Group interment that held a child
between 3.55.5years old.5 The pendant, which rested
at the childs neck, was recovered in the laboratory
during the cleaning of the skeletal remains. Burial254
was directly beneath the coffin of another young child
of less than 2years of age; the two youngsters appear
to have been placed together in an area crowded with
burials.
A glass-and-wire-filigree ornament was found on
the cranium of the infant in Burial186, a Late Group
interment. Although seemingly aligned with adult
burials to the north, Burial186 is one of a handful of
spatially isolated infant burials.
Adults with Personal Adornment

The woman in Burial340 wore two strands of beads
assembled primarily from a mix of European-made
glass in shades of blue and yellow (Figure229). The
smaller of the two strands, a bracelet with 41glass beads,
was draped around her right wrist. The larger strand
encircled her hips; it held 70glass beads, 1amber
bead, and 7cowries. These two strands account for all
of the cowries recovered from the New York African
Burial Ground and approximately 76percent of the
beads (112 of 147specimens), including half of the
The characteristics of each Bead Type are summarized in The
Bead Assemblage section of this chapter. Beads from each type are
illustrated in this section.
4
Metal jewelry associated with infants, young children, and adults

is illustrated in the Inventory of the Rings and Other Jewelry
section of this chapter.
5
bead types represented (Bead Types14, 79, 12,

15). Burial340 is assigned to the Early Group. The
woman it held was between 39 and 64years old when
she died. In addition to her jewelry, she was interred
with other items, including an unused tobacco pipe
(see Chapters5 and 14).
Two other adults each had a single bead. Burial250,
an Early Group burial of an adult of undetermined sex
and age, had a large spherical bead of opaque black
(Bead Type11). The bead was recovered from the
central part of the coffin, possibly near the pelvis, in
association with an iron mass, a pewter tack, and a
copper-alloy button. The 3540-year-old woman in
Burial107, a Late-Middle Group interment, had an
opaque redwood bead with a transparent green core
(Bead Type5). The bead was recovered near her ear
during the cleaning of the skeletal remains in the
laboratory.
Adults were laid to rest with their rings as well
as their beads. Four copper-alloy finger rings, two
of which had glass (paste) insets of seemingly
identical design, were associated with women from
three temporal groups. The 4452-year-old woman
in Burial310 wore her paste ring (Catalog No.1486B.001) on her left hand, although the exact finger
placement is unknown. The ring was recovered in the
laboratory, minus its central inset, which is thought to
have been missing at the time of interment. Burial310
has been assigned to the Middle Group; the grave
appears to have been placed along the south side
of the fence that once traversed the site. The paste
ring of the 4050-year-old woman in Burial242 was
found on the third finger of the right hand (Catalog
No.1229-B.003). Coins were placed over her eyes;
pins found in her lumbar region and sternum are suggestive of clothing. She was buried in what appears to
be a north-south row of graves situated north of the
fence line; her grave is assigned to the Late Group,
post-1776.
The 2535-year-old women in Burials115 and 71
wore rings with plain bands (Catalog Nos.858-B.001
and 813-B.004, respectively), the former on the third
finger of the left hand, the latter on the third finger of the
right hand. Pin fragments on the cranium of the woman
in Burial115 suggest shrouding; her grave is assigned to
the Middle Group. Copper staining at the hips, probably
from pins, of the woman in Burial 71 hints at clothing.
Burial71 is assigned to the Late Group.
One woman (Burial377, a Late-Middle Group
interment) had three copper-alloy rings (no catalog
number assigned) that lay side by side near her throat
Figure 229. In situ drawing of Burial 340 showing beads in pelvic area (redrawn by M. Schur from photocopy of original field drawing).
Figure 230. In situ photographs of Burial 377 showing copper-alloy rings

found at the throat. The diameter of the ring in the detail is 30 mm.
Two additional copper-alloy rings (not visible in the photographs) were
recovered adjacent to it (photographs by Dennis Seckler).
(Figure230). One of the rings had a small fragment

of hair or fiber attached to the bottom. The material
may have been from a string of some sort. If that was
the case, then the rings might have been part of a
necklace. The woman in Burial377 was between 33
and 58years old. Whether she was interred in a coffin is unclear. Excavators noted deteriorated material,
possibly remnants of a coffin lid and floor, above and
below the skeletal remains. A substance excavators
believed to be red ocher was observed on the possible
wood remnants.
Decorative cuff links were found with six individuals. Some of the cuff links, called sleeve buttons
or links of buttons during the eighteenth century,
came in plain and fancy versions. Others were no
longer attached to their mates. Still others were missing the shanks that would have been soldered to their
backs when the items were new. The two turquoise
enamel faces recovered from Burial371 were decorated with a squat, white-and-pink V that straddled
two like-colored dots (Catalog No.1875-B.001). This
burial, which is assigned to the Middle Group, held
a 2535-year-old woman interred without a coffin;
the cuff-link faces were found beneath her left upper
arm. The turquoise enamel face recovered near the
chin of the individual in Burial211 was undecorated
(Catalog No.1186-B.001). This individual, probably
a man, also was interred without a coffin directly over
another grave, in what appears to be a north-south row

of Late Group burials, post-1776.
Three men had octagonal-shaped copper-alloy cuff
links with impressed designs. One pair was recovered
near the left wrist of a man of undetermined age who
occupied Burial341, which is assigned to the Middle
Group (see Figure 198 in Chapter 12). This mans
coffin was directly atop the coffin of a woman with
whom he may have shared a grave. Two pairs were
found near the wrists of the 4050-year-old man
in Burial238, a Late-Middle Group interment (see
Figures 176 and 177 in Chapter 12). Another LateMiddle Group interment, Burial392, held a 4252year-old man with two cuff-link faces, one near the
right shoulder and another near the cervical vertebrae
(see Figure 214 in Chapter 12). Buttons and fibers
indicate that he was clothed when interred; unlike most
burials, the head was oriented to the east. In addition,
a pair of round, gilded copper-alloy cuff links was
recovered from each wrist of the 2030-year-old man
in Burial158, another coffinless burial from the Late
Group (see Figure 155 in Chapter 12).
Seven individuals were apparently laid to rest in
jackets, shirts, and breeches fastened with a mix of
decorative buttons, primarily cast copper alloy but
also pewter and wood. Button faces ranged in style
two had anchor motifs; others were domed, smooth,
ridged, and gildedbut the buttons worn by particular

individuals did not always match. The domed buttons
belonged to men from the Middle Group (Burials326
and 415). Another man, a Late-Middle Group interment, had smooth-faced buttons (Burial10), as did
a probable woman (Burial259) and a probable man
(Burial 6) whose graves are assigned to the Late
Group. The latter two individuals also had buttons in
other styles, including buttons with ridged faces (the
woman) and anchor motifs (the man). Two other Late
Group burials also had decorative buttons. The man in
Burial325 had a single gilt copper-alloy button. The
buttons recovered from the man in Burial181 came
in different materials as well as styles. Four of the
buttons had turned bone backs and copper-alloy fronts
decorated with repouss or impressed designs.
Problematic Cases
Artifacts with ambiguous provenience are not uncommon on archaeological sites, and the adornment
assemblages have their share. A whitish tan bead characteristic of African manufacture (Bead Type13) was
found in soil to the west of the bones from Burial434,
a Middle Group interment that was only partially
excavated when fieldwork ceased. The age and sex of
the burials occupant could not be determined. Grave
fill from Burial428, another Middle Group interment,
yielded two gray beads with facets (Bead Type10).
This burial held a woman between 40 and 70years of
age. A third burial from the Middle Group, Burial398,
was found in redeposited soil that contained a copperalloy ring and fragments from a copper-alloy cuff link
with an octagonal shape. The remains of the deceased,
an adult between 25 and 35years old, were heavily
disturbed by the construction of a retaining wall during
the archaeological excavation of the site.
There is one case in which cuff links were recorded
in the laboratory but not in the field. Laboratory
records indicate that a fragment of a cast copper-alloy
cuff link or button from an unknown provenience was
attributed to Burial387, an Early Group interment of
a man between 34 and 44years of age. The item was
not photographed and was not recovered after the
collapse of the World Trade Center.
Finally, a curved piece of copper alloy, identified
tentatively as either a remnant of an earring or a bent
pin, was attached to a fragment of coffin wood recovered from Burial332, a Late-Middle Group interment
of an adult, probably a man, between 35 and 40years
old. It was found in the laboratory when the thoracic
vertebrae were cleaned. More distinctive than the
object is the mark on the coffin, HW38, which is

discussed in Chapter10.
Problematic cases are not reflected in the count of
burials with personal adornment. Had the problematic
cases been included, the total would still form too
modest a base to support meaningful inferences about
consumer preferences or aesthetic trends.
Discussion
Of all the objects associated with the individuals
interred at the African Burial Ground, adornment
would seem to be the special preserve of the self.
Shroud pins, coffins, and grave markers are the stuff
of cemeteries. Adornments, in contrast, are personal
effects that presumably kept company with their wearers prior to death. Moreover, adornments may have
been among the most meaningful of the personal
effects that New Yorkers living under slavery used or
owned. Unlike clothing, which slaveholders supplied,
the grace notes fell to Africans themselves.
Perhaps it is not surprising, then, that black New
Yorkers enlisted their adornments to redress constraints slavery placed on their day-to-day lives. Newspapers of the period call attention to the deployment
of adornment in pursuit of freedom. On view at the
New York African Burial Ground, with the infants and
young children in Burials186, 187, 226, and 254, is
another foundational project adornment supported:
the shoring up of intergenerational ties.
Manhattans compact homes and episodic commercial economy made an inauspicious framework
for African childrearing. Africans resided in every
municipal ward during the 1700s, but they typically worked apart from their compatriots and kin.
Slaveholdings were smallsingletons and pairs were
the norm; turnover among owners was high; and
family members were scattered when sold within
the city and its surrounds (Kruger 1985:128259;
Medford, Brown, Carrington, etal. 2009a:7073;
White 1991:8892). Information about how parents
cared for children who lived at a remove is difficult to
come by. Weekend and workday visits, and the gifts
that enlivened them, were a key strategy for maintaining intergenerational attachments in the plantation
colonies of Virginia and South Carolina (Morgan
1998:498558). Visiting and gift giving would also
have connected the families that city dwellers formed.
Yet black family visiting went largely unnoticed in
white Manhattan unless truancy was involved (on
New Yorkers who ran away to visit relatives, see

White [1991:134139]). The things adults routinely
provide to infants and young childrenfood, names,
stories, spiritual instruction, physical carewent
unnoticed, too, as did occasional gifts, such as a silver
pendant, a piece of filigree, a necklace, and a string
of beads looped at the waist.
The relationship between the adult givers and the
child receivers did not come down to us. Among
the possibilities are fictive kin, relatives created by
cultural convention rather than the circumstances of
birth. Also unknown are the events that prompted the
gift giving, and the material burdens that the givers
incurred. Only the lines of exchange are intact. They
tell of emotional and material investments in children
within a community where the likelihood of seeing
children mature was uncertain.
Instances of adult-to-child gift giving in the archaeological record of eighteenth-century slavery are
unusual, both in mainland America and farther afield.
In addition to the four youngsters at the New York
African Burial Ground, a child with a bead necklace
was uncovered in the African portion of a cemetery
shared by the Nagel and Dyckman families, Dutch
homesteaders with adjoining farms in Washington
Heights, now a part of upper Manhattan (Bolton
1924:203204). A burial site in the Chesapeake held
an infant interred with a string of small white beads
(Hudgins 1977:70). No adornments were recovered
with the infants and young children laid to rest at Newton Plantation; interment practices at this Barbados
cemetery were selective, however, and relatively few
infants and young children were buried there (Handler
and Lange 1978:285287).
Although material endearments deepened ties
among peers, the gifting of jewelry to friends, sweethearts, and spouses is not accessible from the burial
ground. Unlike the young children found wearing
adornment, the adults did not leave behind any telltale evidence about the hands that brought personal
decorations into their lives. Neither did the items the
adults had. Buttons and cuff links destined for clothing
could have been received as gifts, along with rings
and strung or single beads. Conversely, all of the
items could have been self-acquired, including the
finger rings with plain bands (Burials71 and 115) that
connote matrimony to twenty-first-century American
eyes. Africans who lived 300years ago saw rings in
a different light (see Herbert 1984:2331). So, also,
did colonial Americans of European descent (Fales
1995:2341). Because the custom of wearing wedding rings was not universally common among the
latter, there would have been little reason to pressure

enslaved Africans to solemnize their unions with
rings.
Men and women configured their worlds when they
wore adornment, not just when they gave it away.
Accessories reserved for festive occasions helped
separate work from leisure, a role that clothing played
(White 1991:195). Adornment worn every day also
put a stamp on the routines and rituals in which adults
engaged. The waist beads from Burial340 exemplify
the everyday category, albeit with a twist: they would
have been hidden beneath the wearers clothes, if not
in Manhattan, then in parts of Ghana and Nigeria,
where women used waist beads to apportion the public
and private sides of their lives. Waist beads doubled
as foundation garments. But rather than reshaping a
womans figure, like girdles or corsets, waist beads
helped conceal it from view. The garment (typically
a wrapper or an apron) that covered a womans hips
was tucked around the beads, which functioned as an
under belt to keep the garment secure. Waist beads
were removed from time to time for restringing but
otherwise stayed in place. They were visible to people
who lived in emotional and physical proximity to
the wearer, such as a husband or a sweetheart, and
the women with whom she bathed and groomed (for
the etiquette of waist-bead concealment and display
among the Akuapem of Ghana, a group whose kingdom dates to the beginning of the 1700s, see Gilbert
[1993:126127]).
Whether the waist beads from Burial 340 were
worn daily beneath a gown or a petticoat is impossible
to know. Still, the beads are a point of contact with the
gendered dimensions of the world black New Yorkers
created. Historians of black life in eighteenth-century
Manhattan have pieced together male-to-female population ratios and patterns of labor (Kruger 1985; White
1991). The Skeletal Biology Team has reconstructed
male and female mortality trends (see Blakey, RankinHill, etal. 2009 [Chapter13 of Skeletal Biology of
the New York African Burial Ground]). Evidence
concerning how Africans construed manhood and
womanhood is harder to find. Womens subjective
understandings about femininity and comportment are
particularly elusive, not only for Manhattan but also
for the regions from which captives came. The images
and associations that made waist beads meaningful
to women with dissimilar backgrounds and experiences are elusive as well (for present-day images
among the Yorb of Nigeria, see Drewal and Mason
[1998:8081]).

Although some adornment wearers drew on the
fashions of their homeland, others looked to their
friends. Thomas de Voe, a chronicler of the citys public markets, called attention to stylistic camaraderie
among black youths and men who showed off their
dance moves at Catharine Market, an east-side foodselling venue established in 1786. A dance contingent
from Long Island favored neatly tied queues and
improvised wigs. The signature look of a group from
Tappan, New Jersey, centered on plaited forelocks
bound with tea lead, a thinly hammered lead alloy
named for the tea boxes it lined (De Voe 1969:341,
344345 [1862]). De Voe did not describe the decorations black bystanders wore, but sorting out the
influences and sizing up the trends would have been
more difficult in the city than in its less congested
surrounds.
Matters of style are no better documented on the
African side of the Atlantic than in New York. Beads
and metal jewelry were available throughout the Atlantic world, as discussed in the section entitled Personal
Adornment in Historical Context, and adornment
wearers in western Africa were inveterate recyclers
of local and imported goods. Yet the canon of knowledge built by observers during the seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries makes a poor fashion gazetteer.
It highlights the coasts rather than the hinterlands
that provisioned New Yorks African labor force (see
Curtin 1964:1127; see Figure27 in Chapter 2). Its
sociological sightlines are limited as well. More often
than not, what dazzled European visitors and African artists of the day were the accoutrements of the
privileged and the sumptuary systems that underwrote
the expansion of African states (on the use of art to
advance statecraft in eighteenth-century Benin, see
Ben-Amos [1999]).
Observers like the Reverend Willhelm Mller illustrate the extent of the documentary gaps. During his
stay in the Gold Coast kingdom of the Fetu, Mller
noticed the adornments of the general public as well
as of the elite. Ordinary men who lived in the shadow
of Fort Frederiksborg, where Mller served as chaplain from 1662 to 1669, wore poor-quality beads or
cowries around their necks and copper or iron rings
on their arms and hands. Ordinary women plaited
their hair elegantly and sometimes [hung] just one
large blue bead in it. A string of common beads,
and perhaps an elegant little cord woven from bark,
encircled their legs, arms, and necks. Cowries were
becoming widely available during this period but were
not used as adornment among the Fetu elite. Wealthy
men and women ornamented themselves with gold

and precious stones (Jones 1983:203207).
Because only a small fraction of the eras adornment styles entered the historical record, the beads
and other jewelry from the New York African Burial
Ground are unreliable guides to their wearers ethnic
roots. Yet these items are not bereft of identifying
detail. They belong to an era when Africans in geographically far-flung places were using mass-produced
goods to organize everyday desires and circumvent
the inequities that troubled their lives.
Personal Adornment in
Historical Context
Personal adornments like those found at the New
York African Burial Ground were highly portable
and widely circulated, both in the Atlantic world and
in mainland North America. Most, if not all, were
available in New York City as well. We look briefly
at the traffic in adornment along the west African
coast, where the majority of Africans sent directly to
New York from the 1660s onward were embarked; in
the Caribbean, where Africans were transshipped to
North American ports; in mainland America, where
trade was oriented to Native American populations;
and finally, in the city of New York.
Because the African Burial Ground provided a
resting place for black New Yorkers during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, our temporal focus is
confined to the high tide of Atlantic trade. This period
witnessed enormous change in the material worlds of
the regions from which captives were taken: monetary
standards, sumptuary codes, and consumption patterns
were reconfigured as European and African powers
vied for control of labor and goods. Commerce and
consumption on the American side of the Atlantic
changed dramatically, too. Economic expansion in
the decades after 1680 drew colonial Americans into
the consumer revolution then sweeping through the
Netherlands, Britain, and France. By the mid-1700s,
material goods appeared with increasing frequency
at cheaper prices among far more consumers than
ever before (Butler 2000:154). Understanding how
adornment from an African cemetery in lower Manhattan is entangled with Atlantic commerce is important
because African labor produced much of the plenitude
that seventeenth- and eighteenth-century consumers
enjoyed.

Glass beads formed the largest portion of personal
decorations imported to western Africa, with many
billions landed in barrels, cases, and casks along
the Guinea Coast (Alpern 1995:22). Venice was the
main center of European bead production, although
bead making also thrived in the Netherlands from the
late-sixteenth through the mid-eighteenth centuries
(Baart 1988; Karklins 1974; Van der Sleen 1963).
Bohemia, Moravia, Austria, and France had glass
bead industries as well.
Prior to the heyday of European mercantile imperialism, glass beads from Egypt, South Asia, and Spain
reached western Africa via trans-Saharan trade routes.
So, too, did beads made of carnelian and other precious stones. The trans-Saharan traffic in exotic-glass
and -stone beads was supplemented by local production and benefited primarily the political elite (Insoll
and Shaw 1997:1516; Ogundiran 2002:432436).
For the West African public at large, the mass availability of glass beads coincided with the boom in
Atlantic commerce.
To be sure, glass beads and jewelry such as silver chains and metal rings represented only a small
percentage of the overall value of European imports.
Cloth and clothing dominated the EuropeanWest
African trade from start to finish (Alpern 1995:6).6
Yet the sheer volume of personal adornment was
nonetheless enormous, and it grew in amount and
range as the eighteenth century progressed.
Imports of personal decorations varied regionally, as did imports of cowries and metal, two other
materials from which adornments were made. Cowries may have touched the daily lives of [ordinary]
individuals more profoundly than other Atlantic
imports (Gregory 1996; Ogundiran 2002:440). Cowries underwrote secular and sacred exchange in an
ever-expanding shell-money zone that eventually
extended from the Bight of Benin to the Mali Empire,
where the monetization of cowries took hold in the
The dominance of textiles is evident in Eltiss (2000:300) snapshot
of merchandise shipped from London aboard crown vessels to West
and West Central Africa between 1662 and 1713. Textiles were by
far the most important import, accounting for 55percent by value
for the combined regions of the Guinea Coast, followed by metals
(18percent), cowries (6percent), personal decorations (6percent),
containers (4percent), guns and gunpowder (4percent), spirits
(2percent), luxury goods (1 percent), and miscellaneous items
(5percent). Alpern (1995) provides information on the following
categories of goods: cloth (Indian and European), clothing (especially
kerchiefs, hats, and caps), linens, unworked or semiprocessed metal,
metal containers, and other metal wares such as tools and utensils,
firearms, beads, coral, cowries, spirits, tobacco, glassware, ceramics,
and paper.
6
context of trans-Saharan trade. The amount of cowries in western Africa escalated dramatically with
the shifting of primary supply routes from land to
sea. Between 1700 and 1790, the British and Dutch
cartels that dominated the maritime trade moved more
than 25million pounds by weight of cowriesover
10billion individual shellsinto West African ports
(Hogendorn and Johnson 1986:5861). The contours
of regional supply and demand on the eve of the boom
are shown in Table54, which focuses on cowries and
adornments carried under Englands flag.
Africans refashioned imported commodities into
goods used for personal display and official regalia as
well as food production and market exchange, activities that extend and intensify social life. Unworked
and semiprocessed metal fed a millennia-old industry
attuned to shifts in material availability and consumer
demand (Herbert 1984:911).7 African smiths recast
iron bars into farm implements, household utensils,
and bangles. Brass and copper manillas, open-ended
bracelets imported by the millions to West Africa
beginning in the fifteenth century, were worn as jewelry but also melted down to make plaques, weights,
and measures (Alpern 1995:13). Thin sheet brass was
especially prized in Benin, as Captain Thomas Phillips learned during his stopover in Whydah in 1694;
the sheets were cut up to make bracelets and bands
for adorning the neck and the limbs (Handler and
Lange 1978:156). Bracelets recovered archaeologically from pre-nineteenth-century contexts at Elmina
on the Gold Coast were likely produced from white
metal and iron wire and rods acquired from overseas
(DeCorse 2001:135).
Glass beads shipped from Europe were also
reworked in African locales. The melting, grinding,
polishing, and drilling of imported glass beads predates
the Atlantic trade, as archaeological finds from Mali
and Nigeria attest (DeCorse 1989; Insoll and Shaw
1997; Ogundiran 2002). Although the history of African glassmaking is not well understood, several different industries of unknown ancestry are represented
in West Africa, including one involving the firing, in
clay molds, of chipped and powdered glass (Lamb
1976, 1978; Wild 1937). Glass from the Atlantic trade
came to be used as raw material in the manufacture of
powder-glass beads (DeCorse 2001:137). Powder-glass
beads were recovered at the New York African Burial
Ground with Burials226 and 434.
Frank McManamon, who kindly reviewed a draft of this report for
the National Park Service, contributed to our phrasing of this point.
7

Table 54. Adornments and Cowries Imported into Africa, 16621713, by Region
Region
Value of Personal Decorations Percent of Imports to Each

Percent
Value of Cowries
Imported into Africa
Region Represented by
Represented by
(pounds sterling)
(pounds sterling)
Personal Decorations
Cowries
Upper Guinea
12,700
27
400
Gold Coast
4,600
3,900
Bight of Benin
6,700
38,300
44
Bight of Biafra
13,000
14
800
West-Central Africa
900
Windward Coast
100
not calculated
43,400
Total
38,000
Note: From Eltis (2000:300) adapted by Ogundiran (2002:430).
The presence in colonial Manhattan of glass beads

characteristic of West African manufacture calls attention to the movement of adornment from Africa to the
Americas. This aspect of the material culture of Atlantic
slavery is not well charted. Some Africans arrived in the
Americas with adornment, but how often this occurred
and whether the items were brought from home or
acquired en route is unclear. Captors were not squeamish about confiscating the belongings of the captured,
as indicated by the disheartening spectacle William
Hugh Grove observed in 1732 in a Virginia port: The
Boyes and Girles [aboard the slave ship were] all Stark
naked; so Were the greatest part of the Men and Women.
Some had beads about their necks, arms, and Wasts, and
a ragg or Piece of Leather the bigness of a fig Leafe
(cited in Baumgarten 2002:132). Shippers were not
averse to parceling out adornments stowed on board. In
1796, the women on a slaver anchored in Carlisle Bay,
off the southwest coast of Barbados, wore necklaces
strung with glass beads acquired, apparently, from the
crew. General William Dyott, who described the scene,
learned from the ships master that new-stringing the
beads was the womens chief employment (cited in
Handler and Lange 1978:147).
That eighteenth-century merchants were not always
able to off-load their adornment cargos in African
ports is confirmed by the salvaging of the British
slaver Henrietta Marie. A cache of glass beads was
recovered from the hold of the ship, which sank off
Key West in 1701 during the last leg of its LondonCalabar-Kingston route (African-American Archaeology Newsletter 1997:9).
Yet Africans crossed the Atlantic as sailors, not

just as commodities enchained below deck. Black
seafaring took root in the emerging Anglo-American
maritime world of the second quarter of the seventeenth century. The presence of enslaved and free
black seamen in North American ports and plantation
roadsteads increased steadily after 1740, as did the
number of black New Yorkers who fled from bondage in sailor guise (see entries from 1748 to 1783 on
Table50 in Chapter 12). By 1803, black men filled
approximately 18percent of American seamens jobs
(Bolster 1997:29). Ships and boats provided a porous
boundary across which goods, ideas, individuals,
and aesthetics flowed (Bolster 1997:7). During their
travels, black seamen may well have acquired strings
of beads or cowries, which could have been sold,
exchanged, or given as gifts upon return to port.
European-made glass beads, buttons, cuff links,
and copper-alloy rings were imported to and available
for sale in the circum-Caribbean colonies of Britain,
Holland, Spain and Portugal during the seventeenth
and eighteenth centuries. Captives who ultimately
were transported to New York may have acquired
adornments in the Caribbean. Avenues for acquisition
of adornment included own-account economic activity, such as marketing produce, processed foodstuffs,
and livestock.
Personal decorations produced in European factories circulated widely in mainland North America.
Glass beads and metal and paste rings akin to those
found at the New York African Burial Ground are
documented on colonial-era sites ranging from Upper

Michigan and upstate New York to southern Florida
(see Deagan 1987; Karklins 1992; Quimby 1966;
Smith 1965; Stone 1974; Wood 1974; Wray and
Schoff 1953). French, Spanish, English, and Dutch
trading cartels and colonial agents used adornments
in conjunction with other commodities to negotiate
favored trading partnerships with Native American
populations. Native Americans, in turn, drew on such
items to reconfigure status relations and spheres of
influence amongst themselves.
Imported and locally made jewelry was plentiful
in New York City. Silversmiths who apprenticed in
Europe and in the mainland British colonies crowded
Manhattan, as did specialist jewelers who worked in
enamel and set gems (Fales 1995:6670). Silversmiths
made large and small wares for wealthy patrons and
the general public, sometimes acting as jobbers for
retailers, and sometimes operating retail stores of their
own, often with a jeweler on site (Barquist 2001:25).
Charles Oliver Bruff, a Maryland-born silversmiths
son, employed two jewelers, one from London and
another from Paris. Enameled cuff links, brass buttons, earrings, hair jewels, and all sorts of silver
smiths work could be found on the shelves of his
Maiden Lane shop (New-York Mercury, January3,
1763; New-York Gazette and the Weekly Mercury,
May25, 1772).
Personal adornment was sold in general emporiums as well as specialty stores. The account books
of merchant Samuel Deall record necklaces, earrings,
and beads sold in 1758 (New-York Historical Society,
Account Books of Samuel Deall, Invoice Book T,
17571766). The price of a bunch of black beads,
perhaps like those found with Burial187, was 2shillings and sixpence. Beaded necklacesit is not known
whether of glass or metalranged in price from 1 to
17shillings, whereas earrings suitable for children
sold from 1shilling and 10pence to as much as
1pound 4shillings for fine red drop clusters. Dealls
emporium on Broad Street was typical of its time,
stocking clothing, foodstuffs, house wares, light construction materials, and all elements of ornamentation
for person and home (Arthur 1985:37).
Although Africans are not likely to have patronized
establishments like Dealls or Bruffs, some of the
less expensive adornments merchants and craftsmen
carried would have made their way into smaller retail
venues. Cheap sales and auctions of overstocked
merchandise lowered retail prices, and small-scale
vendors such as peddlers would have bought inexpensively and sold with a modest markup. Stocks of
stolen goods also circulated in the city, and peddlers

were accused of trafficking in ill-gotten wares (on
merchants and peddlers, regulatory legislation, and the
disposal of overstocks, see Matson [1998:131134,
139140, 158]).
Personal adornment may also have been received
as gifts from the households where Africans toiled,
but unlike clothing, jewelry was not customarily given
to enslaved household members.
In summary, personal adornment could have been
acquired in Africa, along the routes by which Africans
reached New York, or in the city itself. Glass beads
circulated throughout the Atlantic world. Metal and
paste rings were traded in Africa and the Americas and
sold in Manhattan stores. A silver pendant would have
been available in a city shop or market stall or as part
of a peddlers stock. Enamel cuff links were imported
and locally produced. And although cowries never
played a visible role in the Native American trade,
all manner of items were bought, sold, and fenced at
the docks and taverns that comprised the waterfront
economy (Linebaugh and Rediker 2000:181182).
Considering the poverty of most who were interred
at the African Burial Ground, the outlay of even one or
two shillings for adornment would likely have been a
considerable expense. Holding on to an adornment for
a long period of time may have been difficult as well.
But however hard-won or precariously held, the beads
and other adornments recovered with the deceased
were treated as inalienable possessions at the end of
their wearers lives. Why these objects were removed
permanently from circulation rather than passed along
to one of the mourners is impossible to know. It is
unlikely that a single explanation exists. The circumstances surrounding the deaths of the 25individuals
directly associated with adornment would have varied.
So, too, would the sensibilities of the neighbors and
kin who laid these individuals to rest.
The Bead Assemblage

The bead assemblage from the New York African
Burial Ground includes 146glass beads and 1amber
bead. The majority of the glass beads were likely
produced in Venice (Murano), but 9glass beads were
produced using distinctive firing methods associated
with West African manufacturing techniques. The
glass beads fell into two structural categories: simple
beads made from a single, undecorated layer of glass
(144specimens, or 99percent), and complex beads

with adventitious decoration (2specimens, or 1percent). Three different production methodswinding,
drawing, and firingwere represented (Table 55 and
Figures 231243).
The color and diaphaneity of the glass beads ranged
from opaque black to opaque and translucent yellow,
light gold, and whitish tan. Transparent blue (58specimens) and translucent blue-green (26 specimens)
beads predominated. The African Burial Ground bead
assemblage, however, does not support hypotheses
about color preference at the collective level (see
Stine etal. 1996) because the majority of the beads
were recovered from a single burial.
Bead sizes ranged from very small (diameters of
2.22.3mm for the black beads from Burial187) to
medium (the powder-glass beads from Burial226
were approximately 4.5mm in diameter; most of the
blue and light gold beads were in the 57-mm range),
and large (the opaque black bead from Burial250 was
13.6mm in diameter).

and Chain of Custody
8
Almost all the beads were recovered in the field during careful scraping of soil from skeletal remains. Ten
beads from Burial187 were found when screening the
soil. The bead from Burial107 was recovered in the
laboratory when the skeletal remains were cleaned.
The majority of the beads were vitrified and glassy.
Most beads exhibited signs of glass disease, surface
corrosion, pitting, or frosting. The beads were cleaned
with a dry brush to remove the soil but not the weathered surface, a corrosion product that represents the
deteriorated original surface, and hence the dimensions of the once-healthy glass.
Porous, flaking, and friable surfaces of six beads
from Burial340 were impregnated with acryloid B-72
to prevent further loss of surface detail. All other
beads were left untreated, although five beads from
Burial340 were sent to the Metropolitan Museum of
Art for SEMS/ED elemental analysis. The analysis
was undertaken to determine the relationship between
chemical composition and corrosion pattern. Test
results indicated that the beads were composed primarily of soda, lime, and silica, with varying levels
Conservation information for the three assemblages discussed in

this chapter was obtained from John Milner Associates (see LaRoche
2002:2939).
8
of magnesium and other trace elements. Visually

identical glass beads with different patterns of corrosion had different chemical formulations.
The beads were inventoried and discussed by conservator Cheryl La Roche (1994a, 1994b) for John
Milner Associates. The assemblage was then reexamined for the Howard University Archaeology Team
by archaeologist ChristopherR. DeCorse at Syracuse
University (fall 1998, spring 1999, summer 2001).
Syracuse University returned the beads to the New
York laboratory during the summer of 2001. Jon Abbott
took a final set of photographs in August 2001. At that
time, the beads were packed by the Bronx Council of
the Arts and shipped by Artex to its art storage facility in Landover, Maryland, pending preparation for
reburial. The beads were reinventoried by the Army
Corps of Engineers at the Landover facility in 2003 and
subsequently transshipped back to New York, where
they were placed in coffins for reburial.
Methodology and Definitions

DeCorse examined the beads under magnification
of 10x20x with strong light. The descriptive data
recorded for each bead included the following information.
Manufacture: The primary technique(s) used in the
creation of the bead, such as winding, drawing, and firing (see Karklins 1985, 1993; Kidd and Kidd 1983).
Structure: This term refers to the arrangement or
relationship of the parts of a bead. Structure refers
to gross physical characteristics, such as the number
of layers or applied decorative elements, not to the
chemical or physical characteristics of the glass. Following Karklinss terminology (1985), two structural
categories are represented in the assemblage: simple
beads, made from a single, undecorated layer of glass,
and complex beads, simple beads with adventitious
decoration.
Secondary Modification: The alteration of the
shape, color, or opacity of a bead through reheating,
tumbling, grinding, cutting, and kindred techniques.
Beads were modified both at the place of manufacture
and long after they left the factory floor. Determination of when modification took place is sometimes
impossible. Some secondary modification techniques,
however, can be correlated with particular manufacturing sites.
Venetian manufacturers used several techniques
of heat rounding to alter cylindrical drawn beads
into spherical, oblate, and barrel shapes. The a speo

Table 55. Bead Types at the African Burial Ground
Type of Bead
Description
Burial
No.
Count
Diameter Length
(mm)
(mm)
Glass
Drawn
1
Simple; heat rounded; oblate, occasional examples more

barrel shaped; surfaces dull; translucent yellow; typically
have heavy opaque white to yellowish brown patination
that obscures actual color; surfaces degraded and pitted,
typically more degraded at ends.
340
15
2.83.3 1.72.8
Simple; heat rounded; some examples have attributes associated with the a speo technique, such as protuberances,
tails, and off-center perforations; spherical to oblate, occasional examples globular or more barrel shaped; dull to
shiny; transparent blue; minor to moderately pitted, some
chips and scratches, some examples have lunate scars.
340
58
4.87.3 3.87.0
Simple; heat rounded; oblate/donut shaped; dull; translucent blue-green; degraded, very pitted.
340
26
2.93.5 1.92.5
Simple; heat rounded; oblate; dull; opaque black; some

scratches, minor pitting; small chip at aperture.
340
(right side)
6.3
5.6
Compound; slightly heat rounded; cylindrical; opaque redwood on transparent apple-green core; large chip at one end.
107
3.2
7.7
Simple; oblate, donut shaped to tubular; generally dull, but

some examples are more shiny; opaque black, some appear
translucent dark reddish amber under strong light and this
may be color of all examples; moderately degraded with
more wear on ends; pitted; many bubbles present in glass.
187
22
2.23.3 1.32.6
Simple; truncated cone; dull; translucent light gold; opaque

white patination; weathered and pitted. In all examples, the
top of the cone has been broken off after manufacture,
which may represent intentional secondary modification by
the user(s); the flake scar is covered with same patination
as the rest of the bead.
340
5.86.6 4.75.4
Simple; faceted; color obscured by heavy opaque patination,

probably colorless or transparent amber; heavy opaque
brown patination layer; has parallels from Elmina.
340
3.35.9 5.56.2
Complex; barrel; dull; opaque black, appears dark amber

under strong light; gold foil wave pattern on each end; gold
foil has worn off in places; scratches, some pitting, two
large flakes at one end.
340
10
Simple; faceted with eight pressed facets; dull; transparent

light gray; pitted.
428
11
Simple; spherical; dull to shiny; opaque black; some pitting and weathering of surface.
250
Wound
6.1
6.1
8.69.6 7.88.1
13.6
10.7

Table 55. Bead Types at the African Burial Ground (continued)
Burial
No.
Count
Complex; barrel shaped; opaque black; three wavy lines

around circumference; very pitted; line decoration has
completely weathered away, leaving grooves; traces of
very degraded glass (possibly patination) suggest color of
line decoration may have been opaque white.
340
8.6
8.9
13
Tubular or cylindrical in shape with a slightly off-center

perforation through the length of bead, with roughly trapezoidal cross section; opaque white, with tan or whitish
brown patination on surface; some pitting and cracking of
surface; bead has a granular appearance under magnification; original microstructure was heterogeneous, as evidenced by multidirectional weathering that starts at multiple points..
434
6.3
3.7
14
Produced by firing glass powder and likely produced in

Ghana; oblate to donut shaped; the original color is difficult to determine, but it was probably opaque yellow.
Though similar in manufactureand also in the weathering representedto the fired bead in Burial 434, they are
much smaller and more regular in appearance, and they were
likely ground to shape after firing. However, it is also possible that the beads were heat treated after initial firing. The
perforations, where visible, are also regular and were likely
polished or drilled after the beads were fired. As in the
Burial 434 bead, the beads have a granular appearance under magnification. Original microstructure was heterogeneous, as evidenced by multidirectional weathering that
starts at multiple points.
226
Bead; 14 facets; dull; transparent red; wear or polishing

has rounded the edges of facets; internal cracks and bubbles; surface pitted, some chipping; damage at apertures;
drilled perforation shows traces of cutting.
340
Type of Bead
Description
12
Diameter Length
(mm)
(mm)
Fired
4.04.8 2.73.8
Non-glass (amber)
15
method, introduced in the eighteenth century, was one

method. It was accomplished by reheating beads on
a specially designed fork, or a speo, placed near the
door of an oven. Karklins (1993) has identified several
diagnostic features on beads altered using this method.
These attributes include tangs or tails of glass where
the more viscous surface of the glass flowed downward. In other cases, beads fused together while on
the a speo. Drawn beads that show evidence of having
been broken apart at the ends, or beads that are fused
together with their perforations in perfect alignment,
were heat rounded by the a speo method. Some of
4.8
4.3
the Type2 beads have many of these attributes. Some

Type2 beads also have marks within their perforations
that may be indicative of the a speo method. Beads
modified using this technique that do not have any of
these attributes would appear the same as other heatrounded beads, and it is often difficult to differentiate these technique on individual beads. All produce
similar results, and subsequent polishing, use wear, or
weathering obliterates differences. Hence, although
all of the Type2 beads may have been rounded using
the a speo technique, no clear indications are present
on some of the beads.
Figure 231. Bottom two rows, Bead Type 1 (diameters are 2.83.3
mm); top three rows, Bead Type 3 (diameters are 2.93.5 mm). All
beads are from Burial 340 (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 232. Bead Type 2. Diameters are 4.87.3 mm. All beads are
from Burial 340 (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 233. Bead Type 4. Diameter is 6.3 mm. Bead is from Burial
340 (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 234. Bead Type 5. Length is 7.7 mm. Bead is from Burial 107
Figure 238. Left, Bead Type 9 (diameter is 6.1 mm); right, Bead
Type 15 (diameter is 4.8 mm). Both beads are from Burial 340
Figure 239. Bead Type 10. Diameters are 8.69.6 mm. Both beads
are from Burial 428 (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 241. Bead Type 12. Length is 8.9 mm. Bead is from Burial
Drawn beads were also rounded using other methods during the eighteenth century. Before 1817, beads
were rounded in a large pan containing a mixture of
sand and wood ash or plaster and graphite (Karklins
1985:88). The pan was then heated over a charcoal
fire and the mixture continuously stirred.
Shape: The shape is the profile of the bead. Shape
implies nothing about the size or contour of the perforation, the relative length of the bead, or the manufacturing processes represented. An effort has been made
to use terminology that is clear in casual reading but
precise in relation to the attributes represented. For this
reason, some terms popular in common usage, such as
barrel shaped and donut, have been retained.
Spherical Beads: Spherical beads have shapes
approximating a sphere, mathematically defined as
an approximately round body in which the surface is
equidistant from the center at all points. Few beads
are precisely spherical; the term is used to indicate
shapes that are clearly round.
Oblate Beads: Oblate beads have profiles that are
circular to ellipsoidal.
Globular Beads: Globular beads have a semispherical or ellipsoidal aspect but are irregular or nonsymmetrical in cross section. Beads of this shape include
specimens such as drawn beads that have been heat
rounded or cooked.
Cylindrical Beads: Cylindrical beads always have
clearly circular cross sections along their entire length,
the sides of the beads being parallel to the line of the
perforation. The term is used for beads with the very
regular, straight profiles often associated with drawn
beads that have not been heat altered.
Tubular Beads: Tubular beads are often cylindrical
but lack the very regular, parallel surfaces characteristic of drawn or molded beads. The term tubular
should not be conflated with the terms tube or tube

beads, which have been used to describe drawn
beads.
Barrel-Shaped Beads: Barrel-shaped beads have a
circular cross section, widest in the middle, decreasing in a regular way to flat or semiflat ends. The side
profiles of these beads appear as arcs that intersect
planes at each end.
Conical Beads: Conical beads have profiles that
decrease in a regular line from one end to the other.
Bead Facets: Facets are intentional planes on the
surface of a bead produced by grinding, molding or
marvering.
Decoration: A wide variety of decorative techniques are employed in bead manufacture. Only two
beads examined in the New York African Burial
Ground assemblage were decorated. These are Bead
Types9 and 12. In each case, the decoration consists of
adventitious decoration on a wound bead. The Type9
bead is an opaque back bead with a trailed decoration
of gold foil. The Type12 bead is opaque black with
traces of a trailed (possibly opaque white) decoration.
Both types are typical of Venetian manufacture.
Color: Colors should be regarded as approximate
rather than absolute. Color is an ephemeral characteristic, often appearing slightly different under different
viewing conditions. Individual perceptions may also
result in different readings. The minute size of some
of the decorative components also makes precise color
determination a challenge. In addition, color is often
variable even on specimens of similar age from the
same factory. Prior to the twentieth century, manufacturing techniques were not precise, and slight color
variations might result. Postproduction weathering
through use or burial in an archaeological site creates
additional variation.
Diaphaneity: Each color is preceded by its diaphaneity, which is opaque, translucent, or transparent.
Opaque glass is impenetrable to light. Translucent
glass transmits light but diffuses it so that objects
on the other side are indistinct. Transparent glass
allows objects on the other side to be clearly viewed.
In recording this attribute, an attempt was made to
determine the beads original character.
Luster: The appearance of the beads surface in
reflected light. In contrast to color and diaphaneity,
this attribute often reflects postmanufacture use wear,
weathering, and modification. Two luster types are
used to describe the beads from the New York African
Burial Ground: shiny (smooth and bright) and dull
(not shiny).

Size: This refers to the length and diameter are
given for each bead or, if a type is being described, a
range for each dimension. Measurements reflect the
maximum length or width. Generalized categories
of length, such as short, standard, and long, defined
in terms of specific length to width ratios, are not
used.
Manufacture, Age, and Origin

As noted, the majority of the beads in the assemblage
were likely produced in Venice. They consisted almost
entirely of simple monochrome beads that have comparatively wide temporal and geographic distributions
and that have been documented on a wide variety of
archaeological sites. They are completely consistent
with, although not restricted to, the African Burial
Grounds historically documented period of use. Notably absent were distinctive nineteenth-century bead
types, including the products of Bohemia.
The significant exceptions were one amber bead
(Type15) from Burial340 and nine powder-glass beads
of likely West African origin, one from Burial434
(Type13) and eight from Burial226 (Type14).
Amber beads were traded in Africa as well as in
Europe (Alpern 1995:23; Dubin 1987:101). British
Customs House ledgers indicate that amber beads
were also shipped to New York (Breen 2004:62). It
is possible that the Burial340 amber bead, which
is translucent red in color with 14worn or polished
facets, originated in Africa. However, no exact parallels to the Burial340 bead are known from African
or European archaeological contexts.
The powder-glass beads were simple in structure.
Type13 (from Burial434) was opaque whitish tan
in color and cylindrical in shape, with a slightly offcenter perforation through the length of the bead.
The eight examples of Type14, all from Burial226,
were oblate to donut shaped. The original color is
difficult to determine but it was probably opaque
yellow. Although similar in manufacture to the bead
from Burial434, the Type14 beads were smaller and
more regular in appearance and were likely ground
to shape after firing. However, it is possible that the
beads were heat treated after initial firing. The perforations, where visible, were also regular and likely
produced or drilled after the beads were fired. Both
the Type13 and Type14 beads were covered with an
opaque tan or whitish brown patination on the surface
and were very degraded and friable, exhibiting pitting
and cracking. The beads had a granular appearance
under magnification. Multidirectional weathering that

starts at multiple points indicates the heterogeneity of
the original microstructure.
Although there is some evidence for indigenous
glass manufacture in West Africa, fired glass beads
from Ghana, as well as other areas, relied on the
reuse of imported European glassware, beads, and
bottles. Using this technology, glass fragments are
pounded into a fine powder that is placed into fired
clay molds. These molds have small recesses at the
bottom, into which thin reeds or cassava (manioc)
stems are placed. During firing, the stem burns away,
leaving a perforation through the bead. Firing, which
is known ethnographically, is done in small, domed
ovens or kilns made of clay. After removal from the
mold, the beads are shaped and smoothed by grinding. Although this fired-glass technology is found
in other areas of the world, notably Mauritania, the
characteristics and archaeological context of the beads
from Burial226 and 434 would indicate that Ghana
was their likely place of origin.
Using a variety of molds, different colors of glass,
and imported beads, African glassmakers were able
to produce beads with a wide variety of elaborate
shapes and decorations. For example, placing layers
of different colored glass into the mold might produce bands. Stripes were made by carefully inserting
lines of colored glass down the sides of the mold.
Intact European beads were also incorporated into
decorations (for illustrations of elaborately decorated
powder-glass beads, see Francis [1993] and Liu etal.
[2001]). This industry continued into the present century and, indeed, our understanding of the technology
is known primarily through observations of twentiethcentury craftsmen.
Beads characteristic of African glassmaking techniques are virtually unknown in American contexts.
The only other example uncovered thus far is from
the Newton Plantation Burial Ground in Barbados
(Handler 1997). Produced using the same technology as the bead from Burial434, the Newton bead
is similar in shape but larger in size. It is possible
that other beads made with powdered glass have
been uncovered in archaeological sites in the African
Diaspora but that their distinctive characteristics have
been unrecognized.
The presence of powder-glass beads in a colonial
New York setting is also exciting from an Africanist
perspective. Only limited finds of such beads have
been recovered in well-dated African archaeological
contexts, including a handful of examples from south-

ern Ghana (DeCorse 2001:137138). Even in African
locales where fired glass beads were produced, European beads predominate on archaeological sites. The
New York African Burial Ground beads thus provide
information on the age of this particular bead-making
technology. Excavated examples from Elmina on the
Gold Coast were present in early eighteenth- through
nineteenth-century contexts.
Typology
The types of beads recovered from the New York
African Burial Ground are defined in Table55 and
illustrated in Figures231 through 243. The inventory in AppendixE, Part3 of this volume, describes
each bead in full. The typology DeCorse created
is specific to the New York African Burial Ground
assemblage (for the application of taxonomies developed by Kidd and Kidd and Karklins, see LaRoche
[1994a, 1994b]).
The Cowrie Shells

The cowrie shells were observed during excavation of
Burial340 and were recorded in situ (see Figure229).
Although nine cowries were recorded on the field
drawing prior to removal of the skeletal remains,
one of the cowries was later found to be a fragment
of bone. Another cowrie was not recoverable and
may have been an impression of a shell in the soil
(LaRoche 1994a:19). It is not known which of the
cowries depicted on the drawing were among the
seven cowries that constitute the assemblage.
The shells became friable when exposed to air.
Application in the field of polyvinyl acetate adhesive
as a consolidant caused soil to adhere to the surface
of the shells, as shown in Figure244.
Information about conservation and treatment is
not available. The cowries were packed by the Bronx
Council of the Arts and shipped by Artex to its art storage facility in Landover, Maryland, pending preparation for reburial. They were then reinventoried by the
Army Corps of Engineers in 2003 and transshipped
back to New York, where they were placed in coffins
for reburial.
Information about the identification of the cowries is not available. They might well have originated in the Maldives, a group of atolls in the Indian
Ocean that supplied the cowries (Cypraea moneta)
that dominated the Atlantic trade. Cowries thrive in
Figure 244. Cowrie shell from Burial 340. Length is 16 mm

warm, shallow lagoons. In addition to the Maldives,

cowries are harvested along the East African coast,
offshore of Mozambique and Zanzibar. Shells from
the same species that are harvested in different time
periods show no discernable difference (Hogendorn
and Johnson 1986:79).
The Rings and Other Jewelry

This portion of the New York African Burial Ground
adornment assemblage consists of 11items: 5copperalloy finger rings (3plain bands and 2bands with
glass insets); a cast silver pendant with a pear-shaped
dangle; a glass-and-wire-filigree ornament; 3cufflink faces covered with turquoise enamel (1plain; 2
with designs); and 1curved fragment of copper alloy,
perhaps from an earring or a pin.

Definitions, and Chain of Custody
Most items were observed during field excavation of
the skeletal remains and were photographed and/or
drawn in situ prior to removal. The exceptions were
the silver pendant from Burial254, the paste ring from
Burial310, and the curved copper-alloy object from
Burial332; these were recovered during laboratory
cleaning of the skeletal remains.
The three rings from Burial377 are not included in
the assemblage count. The rings, along with cervical
vertebrae, were freeze-dried in the field and removed
intact after photographs were taken. The rings were
not cataloged in the laboratory and appear to have

been lost prior to accessioning by conservators. The
items were not located when the Howard University
Archaeology Team began its work.
The condition of the items in this assemblage
ranged from excellent to structurally unstable. Treatment varied accordingly, with an effort to avoid invasive procedures.
The plain finger rings from Burials71, 115, and
398 were inspected visually and identified as copper alloy based on the corrosion products present.
The term copper alloy is used because the precise
admixture of various alloys is highly variable and is
not considered particularly diagnostic of date or place
of manufacture.
The paste rings were desalinated. The paste ring
from Burial310 was stable enough to undergo mechanical cleaning. The paste ring from Burial242 was
too fragile for cleaning; it was reassembled but not
restored. Both rings were vacuum impregnated with
BTA, a corrosion inhibitor, and then coated with
acryloid B-72.
The pendant from Burial254 was grayish white
and not readily recognizable as silver, despite the
telltale signature of the corrosion product, which was
pale, white, and waxy. The pendant was brittle, most
likely from intergranular corrosion deep within the
alloy. Surface layers at the lower portion of the dangle
were disrupted and discontinuous. The pendant was
mechanically cleaned under a microscope to remove
the silver chloride crust. The damaged portion of
the dangle was repaired with a B-72 adhesive. The
entire pendant was then treated with Acryloid B-72.
Elemental analysis via X-ray fluorescence indicated
the presence of silver. To determine the percentage
or grade of silver, a 0.5-mm sample of the inner
plane of the upper ring was removed for testing
with emission spectrophotometry. The spectrograph
analysis was conducted by John Boyd of the U.S.
Customs Service and utilized a Jarrell Ash Standard
Varisource Emission Spectrophotometer. The content
of the sample was found to be 94100percent silver,
well within the range for pure silver, a designation
reserved for items with a silver content of 92.5percent
and above.
The glass-and-wire-filigree ornament from Burial
186 was not treated. No information is available
on treatment of the undecorated turquoise-colored
enamel cuff-link face. The two decorated enamel
faces from Burial371 were mechanically cleaned and
impregnated with acryloid B-72. Project conservators
theorized that the pink surface decoration and the
turquoise background had faded, respectively, from

red and blue. Given the lack of devitrification, there is
little reason for supposing that the faces were untrue
to their original colors (Emily Wilson, Conservator
of Archaeological Materials, Colonial Williamsburg
Foundation, personal communication 2005).
Staff of John Milner Associates took an initial
series of color slides of the rings and other jewelry,
with certain items photographed before, during, and
after conservation treatment. A second series of photographs (color slides and 35-mm black-and-white)
was taken in 1998, but neither the slides nor the negatives from the second series were salvaged after the
collapse of the World Trade Center.
Laboratory technicians with the Howard University
Archaeology Team reexamined the assemblage from
1997 through 1999 and in 2001. Jon Abbott took final
high-quality photographs in August 2001, after which
the items were packed by the Bronx Council of the
Arts and shipped by Artex to its art storage facility
in Landover, Maryland. The items were reinventoried
by the Army Corps of Engineers in 2003.
Jewelry earmarked for replication was sent to Colonial Williamsburg for study. Items not selected for
replication were sent in September 2003 to Jon Abbott
for digital photography. Abbott photographed each
item from different angles, thus permitting analysis
without access to the items themselves.
Items seconded to Colonial Williamsburg were
returned to New York in September 2003 and, along
with the rest of the assemblage, were placed in coffins for reburial.
Manufacture, Age, and Origin

Personal adornments made and sold in colonial America did not typically carry a makers mark (Fales
1995:23), and the rings and other jewelry from the
New York African Burial Ground were no exception.
Undecorated pieces are especially difficult to date
precisely. Place of origin cannot always be ascertained. Comparative archaeological and documentary
evidence indicate that the items in this assemblage
were consistent with seventeenth- and eighteenthcentury wares.
As noted in the section entitled Personal Adornment in Historical Context, plain copper-alloy rings
had a wide geographical distribution in mainland
North America. So, too, did copper-alloy rings with
glass insets. Consumer demand for inexpensive jewelry ensured a profitable market for paste, and the

Table 56. Paste Rings with Central and Side Insets from North American Archaeological Contexts
Sites
Time Period
Reference
Santa Rosa Pensacola, Florida (Spanish

occupation with French trade links)
17231752
Smith (1965:97)
Seneca/Iroquois sites in western New York

(Rochester area)
17301814
Wood (1974:102)
Fort Michilimackinak, Michigan (late

French/British occupation)
ca. 17501781
Stone (1974:123128)
St. Augustine, Florida (Spanish)
eighteenth century
Deagan (1987:125)
Figure 245.
Reconstruction of
silver pendant from
Burial 254 (drawing
by C. LaRoche and R.
Schulz).
ranks of European producers and American retailers

swelled as the eighteenth century advanced (Fales
1995:4851; Newman 1981:228). Table56 highlights
European spheres of influence at North American sites
where rings with insets identical to the rings from
Burials242 and 310 have been found.
The cast silver pendant from Burial254 has no
counterpart in artifact collections from European
trading posts and Native American encampments
with eighteenth-century dates (Figure245). The lack
of a twin is not for want of commerce in silver. From
the 1750s to the 1830s. silver jewelry lubricated the
fur trade in upstate New York and in the Great Lakes
and upper Mississippi regions (Karklins 1992:93). Fur
from the north and the west passed through colonial
Manhattan; silver ornaments made by city artisans
retraced some of the routes taken by the pelts. Daniel
Fueter, for example, received a commission for two
sets of silver medals intended for Native American
chiefs; engraved with a view of Montreal, the medals
commemorated the French and Indian Wars (Fales
1995:57). The extent to which Manhattan artisans

were involved in the production and import of silver
for Native American consumers is not well documented, however. The output of Philadelphia workshops is far better known (see Gillingham 1936).
The pendant may have been made with the general
customer in mind. Its pear shape was a perennial
favorite among colonial American jewelry wearers
(Fales 1995:47). In contrast, Native American consumers prized dangles in other styles. The simplest
style, known as a tinkling cone, was cut in a conical
shape from flat sheet silver (Fredrickson 1980:43, 46).
An example of a cast dangle worn as a nose ornament
can be seen in Bartolis 1796 portrait of Seneca Chief
Cornplanter; the dangle is gently hooked (illustrated
in Karklins [1992:79]). Pear-shaped dangles may have
become popular among Native Americans in the New
York region during the nineteenth century, when Iroquois artisans took up the silversmith trade. A dangle
from a collection of Iroquois silverwork owned by the
Rochester Museum and Science Center offers a close
match to the New York African Burial Ground pendant (see the illustration in Van Horn [1971:64]). The
collection dates to the second half of the nineteenth
century and was assembled near Rochester.
Enameled jewelry was fashionable during the eighteenth century, although much of it was acquired
ready-made from overseas. Prior to the influx of continental-trained jewelers in the mid-1700s, silversmiths
in colonial America used enamel for inscriptions but
few artisans would have mastered the techniques
needed for more intricate work (Fales 1995:62).
Charles Dutens was among the first wave of enamel
specialists to ply the trade in Manhattan. He worked
out of his lodgings on the lower end of Broad Street
and supplemented his income by teaching French
(New-York Gazette, Revived in the Weekly Post-Boy,
March4, 1751). The enterprising Charles Oliver Bruff

burnished his adornment business in 1763 by hiring
a London-trained artisan who understood every kind
of enameld work in the jewellry way (New-York
Mercury, January3, 1763). Twoyears later, Captain
Jacobson sought to cash in on the vogue for enameled cuff links by selling a shipment of London-made
goods (New-York Mercury, April29, 1765).
Decorative motifs enlivened plain enamel. Consumers from different social circles sometimes favored
the same design. The color and shape of the motif on
the enamels from Burial371 are echoed on a pair of
enamel cuff links recovered from debris at a New York
City Revolutionary War encampment. Along with the
squat V and the two dots (see Inventory), the faces
from the British encampment bear an additional mark,
apparently scratched on.9 The encampment cuff links
are said to show the familiar emblem of Masonry
(Calver and Bolton 1950:227), an attribution based,
perhaps, on the resemblance of the V to a drawing
compass or a carpenters square rule, two of the core
jewels or badges of office around which lodge
governance is organized.
Masonic symbols were a part of the public culture in urban America by the middle decades of the
eighteenth century. The Broad Street tavern kept by
Samuel Fraunces carried the Sign of the freemasons
arms when put up for public auction in 1767 (NewYork Journal or the General Advertiser, December
17, 1767). Widely available pattern books provided
silversmiths and engravers with the official vernacular
of designs for the silver badges of office and the silver
medallions lodge members commissioned for personal
use (Hamilton 1994:45, 126). Colonial merchants
stocked drinking glasses decorated with Masonic
tools. On occasion, Masons in Boston, Charleston,
New York, and Philadelphia paraded through the
streets with their bright silver regalia and unblemished white aprons conspicuously displayed (Bullock
1996:5256).
Yet the visual language of American Freemasonry
has little in common with the motif on the enamels
from the New York African Burial Ground. Craft
symbols replicated on badges and medallions made
during and after the eighteenth century are larded
with realistic detail (see illustrations in Hamilton
1994:134145 and Fales 1995:138139). Small-sized
As of this writing, the encampment cuff links, pictured in blackand-white in Calver and Bolton (1950:225), have not been located
in the collection of the New-York Historical Society.
9
items like enameled buttons show compasses with

hinges and tapered legs, as well as square rules with
discernable measuring lines (see Ertrell 1973:Plate6;
Houart 1977:51).
Free men of color were unwelcome in the Masonic
brotherhoods that formed in colonial American cities
after 1730. Enslaved Africans like Caesar, Prince, and
Cuffee were ineligible for membership. These men,
African New Yorkers who financed their nighttime
junketing by stealing goods, dubbed themselves Free
Masons in 1738, in imitation of the members of
Manhattans Masonic society. Court Recorder Daniel
Horsmanden did not mention whether the threesome
speculated about universal wisdom and ethics when
making the rounds of dram shops and tippling houses.
He mentioned instead that their burlesque was very
ill accepted among bona fide lodge brothers, learned
gentlemen who met semi-secretly in expensive public
taverns and favored a restrictive application of fraternal ideals (see Horsmanden 1971:67fn.q).
The first Masonic lodge for men of African descent,
led by Boston artisan Prince Hall, received a charter
in 1784 (Wallace 2000:183184). The African Lodge
of New York, Boyer Lodge No.1, was established in
Manhattan in February 1812, after the burial ground
had closed (see HarryA. Williamson, A History of
Freemasonry among American Negroes, 1929, Sc
Micro R-2240, Schomburg Center for Research in
Black Culture).
Inventory
Figure 246. Plain, copper-alloy ring from Burial 71 (Catalog No. 813B.004). Outside and inside band surfaces are convex. Inside diameter
is 1.5 cm when whole (mended) (photograph by Jon Abbott). Selected
for replication.
Figure 248. Plain, copper-alloy ring from Burial 398 (redeposited

fill soil) (Catalog No. 2061-B.001). Outside and inside band surfaces
are convex. Inside diameter is 2.1 cm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Selected for replication.
Figure 247. Plain, copper-alloy ring from Burial 115 (Catalog No.
858-B.001). Outside and inside band surfaces are convex. Inside
diameter is 1.8 cm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 249. Copper-alloy ring with glass insets from Burial 242
(Catalog No. 1229-B.003). Construction is cast metal; the ring band
and face were cast as one unit. Each side has three faceted blue
glass insets. The colorless central glass inset is worn on the face.
Diameter of center inset is 0.6 cm; diameter of blue glass insets
is 0.3 cm. Ring portion was mineralized corrosion product. Band
diameter is not measurable (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 250. Copper-alloy ring with glass insets from Burial 310
(Catalog No. 1486-B.001). Construction is cast metal; the ring band
and face were cast as one unit. Each side had three faceted blue
glass insets (diameters are 0.3 cm); one is missing. The central
glass inset also is missing. Inside band diameter is 1.5 cm. The
ring was found during laboratory cleaning of skeletal remains
(photograph by Jon Abbott). Selected for replication.
Figure 251. Copper-alloy and glass jewelry/ornament from Burial

186 (Catalog No. 987-B.001). The ornament appears to be a handshaped glass disk (plate or flat bottle glass) that was set in a wire
filigree frame or base. Diameter of disk is approximately 1 cm.
Textile and textile impressions are associated (photograph by Jon
Abbott).
Figure 253. Fragment of copper-alloy earring or pin from Burial

332 (Catalog No. 1608-B). The object is curved or bent and is
attached to wood. It was recovered during cleaning of thoracic
vertebrae. Inside diameter is approximately 0.8 cm (photograph
by Jon Abbott).
Figure 252. Cast silver pendant from
Burial 254 (Catalog No. 1243-B.001).
Upper portion has a slightly twisted
metal hoop (width is 1.6 cm, length is
0.9 cm) attached to a sphere (diameter
is 0.9 cm). Attached to the bottom of the
sphere is a jump ring from which hangs a
pear-shaped dangle (photograph by Jon
Abbott). Selected for replication.
Figure 254. Enamel jewelry/possible cuff-link or button face from

Burial 211 (Catalog No. 1186-B.001). The oval face is of turquoise
enamel, originally on a copper-alloy backing (dimensions are 1.4 by
1.1 cm) (photograph by Jon Abbott). Selected for replication.
Figure 255. Enameled cuff link faces on copper-alloy backs, from

Burial 371 (Catalog No. 1875-B.001). Dimensions of the faces
are 1.4 by 1.1 cm. The background is turquoise; the decorative
motif is white and pink (photograph by Jon Abbott). Selected for
replication.
Chapter 14
Coins, Shells, Pipes, and Other Items

Warren R. Perry and Janet L. Woodruff
This chapter describes an array of itemscoins, shells,

pipes, nails and tacks, crystals, unique objects, and
botanical remainsthat do not fit neatly into artifact
assemblages organized around function and use or
material, manufacture, and age.
The first part of the chapter provides a profile of
the burials with these items. The items are described
in detail in the section entitled The Assemblage.
Information is provided about recovery, condition and
treatment, chain of custody, methods of analysis, and
where relevant, findings about manufacture, origin,
and age. Burials with possible floral tributes are discussed in Possible Floral Tributes.
Burials with Coins, Shells, Pipes,

and Other Items
Twenty-five individuals, approximately 7percent of
the excavated burials, were directly associated with
coins, shells, pipes, and other items.1 Three other
individuals had items for which provenience is considered tenuous. The burials are listed in Table57.
Burials where the association was problematic are
noted on the table.
Eleven of these burials have been assigned to the
Late Group, three to the Late-Middle Group, eight to
the Middle Group, and three to the Early Group. The
items may have been personal possessions and/or were
placed with the deceased by friends and relatives.
Examples of similar objects and placements from
Africa and the African Diaspora will be discussed in
the section entitled The Assemblage.
The total used here is 376burials, a count that includes burials for
which, at a minimum, the presence/absence of a coffin and in situ
skeletal remains could be determined clearly.
1
Nearly half of the graves included here were

considered to be from the post-1776 period of the
cemetery. Although the numbers are small overall,
there is some suggestion of a shift in practice toward
people being buried with items such as coins, knives,
or pipes. As explained in Chapter9, Late Group
burials probably occurred during the period of the
British occupation of New York, when fugitives
from distant places (including the citys hinterland
and colonies further south) made their way to the
town; or from the period following the war, when
the towns population probably included many relocated/displaced persons. We therefore consider it
possible that burial practices from the later years
of the cemetery reflect diversity based on regional
differences.
The Coin, Shell, Pipe, and

Other Item Assemblage
and Chain of Custody2
Most items were observed during field excavation
of the skeletal remains and were photographed and/
or drawn in situ prior to removal. The crystal cluster
from Burial55, the quartz crystal from Burial289, and
the amber-colored glass sphere from Burial410 were
recovered during cleaning of the skeletal remains.
The condition of the items ranged from excellent to
structurally unstable. Treatment varied accordingly,
with an effort to avoid invasive procedures.
John Milner Associates supplied information about conservation
and treatment (see LaRoche 2002).
2
350 Warren R. Perry and Janet L. Woodruff

Table 57. Burials with Coins, Shells, Pipes, and Other Items
Burial
No.
22
Age
(years)
Sex
2.54.5 undetermined
Temporal
Group
Items
Middle
shell
adjacent to left clavicle

location not recorded
Location in Grave
48
adult
undetermined
Early
knife
135
3040
male
Late
2 copper coins,
mica schist fragment
one in left eye socket, one on right

shoulder; mica schist found during
cleaning of remains
138
35
undetermined
Late
4 metal tacks
one at coffin headboard, one at right

foot; two unknown (found during
cleaning of skeletal remains)
147
5565
male
Late
cluster of small copperalloy rings (7) and pins (4)
158
2030
male
Late
pipe bowl fragment
adjacent to right femur
165
adult
undetermined
Late
pipe stem and bowl
near left arm
186
00.17 undetermined
Late
unidentified iron object

(possible nail)
197
4555
female
Late
tacks
214
4555
male
Late
coin, knife
217
1719
male
Late
peach pit
230
5565
female
Late
2 coins (1 with textile

fragments attached)
242
4050
female
Late
2 coins
289
59
310
4452
female
Middle
tacks
328
4050
female
Middle
broken pot
female
Early
pipe
340 39.364.4
undetermined Late-Middle
quartz disc
between right humerus and ribs
left side of the cranium

two in area between the ankles; three
from unrecorded location
coin and knife near left forearm
on coffin lid
one above left mastoid process; location of other not recorded
eye sockets
unknown; found during cleaning of
skeletal remains
between lower legs
coffin lid
beneath the pelvis
348
12
undetermined
Middle
shell with nail
coffin lid
352
adult
male
Late-Middle
shell with iron object
coffin lid
365
adult
female
Middle
shell and metal object
coffin lid
375
1618
female
Middle
376
4565
male
Late-Middle
coral
coffin lid
387
3444
male
Early
oyster shells
coffin lid
405
610
undetermined
Middle
shell and nail
shell and nail recovered during laboratory cleaning of the cranium
410
adult
female
Middle
glass sphere
not recorded; found during cleaning

of skeletal remains
clay ball with copper-alloy band, right side of right femur/pelvis

surrounded by cloth or leather
Chapter 14 . Burials with Coins, Shells, Pipes, and Other Items 351
Table 57. Burials with Coins, Shells, Pipes, and Other Items (continued)
Burial
No.
Age
(years)
Sex
Temporal
Group
Items
Location in Grave

15
1118
undetermined
Late
metal fragment from an ox shoe above right leg (next to builders

trench); association with burial unclear
55
35
undetermined
Middle
calcite crystal
313
4555
male
Late
2 coins (missing from lab)
found during cleaning of skeletal

remains
beneath the head (excavation notes
altered)
Staff of John Milner Associates took an initial series

of color slides of some items, including the ox shoe
from Burial15, the coins, the clay ball from Burial375,
smoking pipes, and the rings from Burial147. However, owing to their multivalent nature, some of the
items described here were not immediately recognized
as deliberate placements and were afforded less attention. A second series of photographs (color slides
and 35-mm black-and-white) was taken in 1998, but
neither the slides nor the negatives from the second
series were salvaged after the collapse of the World
Trade Center.
Laboratory technicians with the Howard University
Archaeology Team reexamined the assemblage from
1997 through 1999 and in 2001. Jon Abbott took final,
high-quality photographs in August 2001, after which
most items were packed by the Bronx Council of the
Arts and shipped by Artex to its art storage facility in
Landover, Maryland. Some artifacts were left in New
York at the World Trade Center laboratory, and were
lost on September11, 2001.3 The items stored at Artex
in 2003, and returned to New York that September,
where they were placed in coffins for reburial the
following month.
Coins
Copper-alloy coins were found in direct association
with four individuals: two men (Burials135 and 214)
Unless otherwise noted, all artifacts were recovered and reburied

in the coffins of the individuals with whom they were originally
associated. Artifacts that were lost from the World Trade Center will
be noted in the text.
3
and two women (Burials230 and 242).4 All of the

burials with copper coins were from the Late Group,
and all were adults with ages estimated between 30
and 65years. The New York African Burial Ground
sample is small, but the fact that coins were found
exclusively in Late Group burials of older adults suggests that the custom of placing coins on the eyes of
the dead may have been adopted toward the latter part
of the eighteenth century, and reserved for individuals
at the upper end of the life cycle.
In addition to the coins found in these four burials,
two silver coins may have been observed in association with Burial313, a Late Group interment of a
man between 45 and 55years old. However, no coins
from this burial were brought to the conservation
laboratory, and the section of the original excavation
records describing the coins and their location was
erased. The records may have been altered because
no coins were present; on the other hand, the erasure
Another coin was recovered from a disturbed context, apparently
construction fill, within the grave shaft of Burial259, a Late Group
interment of a young adult, probably a woman, aged 1719years.
This coin was similar to those recovered from the four burials
mentioned. It was not reinterred and has been retained with the
grave-shaft-fill artifact collection. Yet another coin was noted in
the grave shaft of Burial276, a coffinless Late Group burial of a
woman between 20 and 24years, well above the level of the human
remains; however, the laboratory did not catalog a coin from this
burial. An inventoried copper-alloy button from an uncertain context
was probably misidentified as a coin in the field notes. This item
was not included with burial artifacts because it did not appear to be
associated with the deceased; furthermore, it was not recovered after
the collapse of the World Trade Center. Finally, a coin was mentioned
in field notes for Burial328 in disturbed soil that could not definitely
be associated with the interment. This coin was cataloged as part of
the non-burial-ground assemblage and was destroyed along with the
rest of that collection on September11, 2001. It was identified in the
290Broadway inventory as a GeorgeII halfpenny.
4
Figure 256. In situ photograph of Burial 135, showing copper

coin (Catalog No. 880-B.001) in left eye socket. Scale is in inches
may have been intended to conceal their discovery.

In situ drawings and photographs do not depict coins
in association with Burial313.
All of the recovered coins were of copper alloy
and were severely worn and corroded, with surface
features no longer visible to the naked eye. Initial
identifications were based solely on coin diameters.
None of the coins was pierced. Coins were desalinated
and mechanically cleaned with care in case surface
features were extant. They were examined by eye and
under magnification, but no features were perceptible.
One of the coins from Burial135 was examined further in a later discussion.
The 3040-year-old man in Burial135 appeared
to have been laid out with a copper coin over each
eye. One coin (Catalog No.880-B.001) was found in
situ in the left eye socket (Figure256), and the other
coin (Catalog No.880-B.002; Figure257) lay above
the right shoulder and probably had fallen from the
right eye socket. Excavators noted that cloth and hair
were preserved on the coins. The coin from the left
eye was X-rayed at the Metropolitan Museum of Art
(Figure258) and surface features (e.g.,the left-facing
profile) were identified as those of a GeorgeII halfpenny, dating between 1727 and 1760. The other coin
was too degraded to identify but may also have been
Figure 257. Copper coin (George II halfpenny) from Burial 135

Abbott).
Figure 258. (a) X-ray of coin (copper George II halfpenny, obverse) from Burial 135 (Catalog No. 880-B.001). Diameter is 30 mm. The
left-facing profile and legend are faintly discernible on the surface of the excavated coin (X-ray by Metropolitan Museum of Art,
supplied by John Milner Associates). (b) 1749 George II halfpenny from the numismatic collection at the University of Notre Dame
Libraries (source: Jordan 1998). Figure 256. In situ photograph of Burial 135, showing copper coin (Catalog No. 880-B.001) in left eye
socket. Scale is in inches (photograph by Dennis Seckler).
Figure 259. Copper-alloy coin from Burial 214 (Catalog No. 1191B.003). Diameter is 23 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 260. Copper coin from Burial 230 (Catalog No. 1216-B.003).
a GeorgeII halfpenny. The coins were approximately

the same size and were both of stamped manufacture.
This grave also contained a fragment of mica schist
that appeared to have been a deliberate inclusion
within the burial (see later section discussing other
items).
The 4555-year-old man in Burial214 had a single
copper alloy coin situated between his left pelvic area
and forearm. The coin (Catalog No.1191-B.003;
Figure259) was cast rather than stamped and its identification as a GeorgeII halfpenny is qualified at best.
It differed in size from the two coins in Burial135. A
knife handle found with the coin is discussed in the
later section discussing other items.
Burial230 held a woman between 55 and 65years
of age who was interred with two cast copper-alloy
coins of markedly different sizes. The larger coin
(Catalog No.1216-B.003; Figure 260) measured
29millimeters in diameter and was found just above
the left zygomatic arch, having probably slipped from
her eye during or after her interment. The smaller
coin (Catalog No.1216-B.001) measured 22millimeters in diameter, and its exact provenience was
not recorded in the field notes. Fragments of textile
had adhered to either side of this coin. The coin may
have slipped from the right eye into her burial garb,
or it may have been inside a pocket or a cloth purse
buried with the woman.
The two cast copper coins associated with the
woman in Burial242 had retained their positions at her
eyes. The coin from her right eye (Catalog No.1229B.001) measured 27mm in diameter (Figure261), and
the one in her left eye (CatalogNo. 1229-B.002) mea-
sured 26mm (Figure262). The woman was between

40 and 50years of age when she died. She wore a
copper-alloy ring with glass insets on her right hand
(see Chapter13).
Copper pennies and halfpennies were probably the
most common denominations circulating among captive Africans and other poor and marginalized people.
The economic activities that enabled African New
Yorkers to acquire clothing, ornaments, or extra food
involved not just barter of services or goods but also
outright purchase with exchange of currency.
The coins found at the New York African Burial
Ground appear to have been common issues circulated
in colonial New York after 1729. The only definitively identified coin, the British George II halfpenny
from Burial135, was minted from 1727 to 1760
but produced in large quantities from 1729 to 1754.
GeorgeIII halfpennies, similar to the GeorgeII coin,
were minted from 1770 to 1775.
The placement of coins with the dead is known
from various western ethnohistoric contexts. In Europe
and its North American colonies, corpses were sometimes buried with coins meant as fares across the
River Jordan (Coffin 1976:76). This practice appears
to have been adapted from the Greek tradition documented in Virgils Aeneid, of placing coins in the
mouths of the deceased as payment to Charon, the
ferryman who conveyed souls across the River Styx
to their postmortem domain. Coins were placed on the
eyes of the deceased in England and other European
countries well into the twentieth century (Roberts
1989:194195). The placement was usually attributed
to a need to hold the eyes closed for aesthetic reasons,
Figure 261. Copper coin from right eye socket of Burial 242 (Catalog
No. 1229-B.001). Diameter is 27 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
but was probably rooted in the traditional belief that

unless their eyes were weighted firmly shut, corpses
would look for someone to accompany them into
death (Coffin 1976:97; Frazer 1886:71; Richardson
2000:19).
Some African American burial practices included
the placement of coins (or coin analogues) with
the deceased. The custom of burying the dead with
coins was observed in excavated cemeteries with
eighteenth- and nineteenth-century contexts, including St. Annes churchyard in Annapolis, Maryland,
and the First African Baptist Church cemetery in
Philadelphia (Jones 2001; Parrington et al. 1989).
Eight individuals at the latter cemetery had coins;
most were found near the heads of the deceased
(Parrington etal. 1989:75). No coins were found (in
the eyes or elsewhere) in eighteenth-century burials
excavated at Newton Plantation in Barbados (Handler
and Lange 1978:201, 318), but evidence exists from
other areas of burial with coins in more recent times.
For example, excavation at a cemetery for enslaved
Africans on Montserrat uncovered at least one burial
that included a single metal disc [that] may have
acted as a token or fee for the return of the deceaseds
spirit to Africa (Watters 1994:64). As at the New
York African Burial Ground, coins were placed on
the eyelids, in the hand(s) or pocket, scattered inside
the coffin, or left on the grave surface. West African
Ashanti burials observed in the twentieth century
included parcels of gold dust tied in the loincloth of
the dead (Habenstein and Lamers 1963:218), a finding that is not inconsistent with the New York African
Burial Ground coins that appeared to be pocketed. A
pierced silver coin, probably worn on a string, was
noted in at least one burial in the nineteenth-century
Figure 262. In situ photograph of Burial

242, showing a copper coin in the left eye
socket (Catalog No. 1229-B.002) and another
immediately beneath the right eye socket
(Catalog No. 1229-B.001). Scale is in inches
Cedar Grove cemetery in Arkansas (Rose 1985:75);

this coin appeared to have been a protective amulet
worn during life. As in European-American cemeteries, coins at the New York African Burial Ground
may have served dual, multivalent purposes: both
the pragmatic (closing of the deceaseds eyes) and
the spiritual.
Shells and Coral

Many of the grave shafts at the New York African
Burial Ground held fragments of clamshell and oyster
shell in the soil matrix, but in some burials, whole or
partial shells were observed in positions suggesting
deliberate placement in the grave. Burials in which the
shell inclusions seemed deliberate were Burials22,
348, 352, 365, and 387 (although the provenience of
the latter was problematic).
The mechanical excavation, as well as recent and
historical construction at the New York African Burial
Ground, obliterated the surfaces of many graves,
including those that may have offered insights into
spiritual practices of seventeenth and eighteenthcentury Africans in New York. The material that can
be clearly associated with the burials, however, dovetails neatly with some West and West Central African
Figure 263. In situ photograph of Burial 22, showing

a fragment of hard-shell clam above the left clavicle
practices as well as those known from the diaspora

(see Vlach 1978; Thompson 1983). The shells at the
New York African Burial Ground may have been
placed as symbols of the deceaseds passage through
water to the spirit world and to represent his or her
new identity as an ancestor. Clams and oysters were
native to the waters surrounding New York, and the
shells would have been easily acquired for placement
on coffins.
A fragment of local hard-shell clam (Catalog
No.344-B) was found in Burial22, a Middle Group
burial of a child between 2.5 and 4.5years old. The
shells position near the left clavicle (Figure263)
may indicate that the shell was strung and worn as a
necklace, much like the adornment on the infant and
child in Burials226 and 254 (see Chapter13). The
shell fragment was lost and presumed destroyed on
September11, 2001.
Three coffins had lid artifacts that consisted of
both a shell and a piece of iron, which appeared to be
deliberate placements. A clamshell fragment (Catalog
No.1702-CL.001) and an iron nail (Catalog No.1702CL.002) were recovered from the lid of Burial348,
a Middle Group interment of a child between 1 and
2years old. The objects lay slightly to the left side of
the hexagonal coffin near the shoulder break, corresponding to the childs upper torso area (Figure264).
The shell lay atop the nail, covering it completely.
Both artifacts were lost and presumed destroyed on
September11, 2001.
Burial352, a man of undetermined age assigned
to the Late-Middle Group, had a whole oyster valve
(Catalog No.1719-CL) with an iron nail (Catalog
No.1719-CLA) on his coffin lid. This pair of artifacts
was recovered from the coffin lid above the torso,
much like the similar combination from Burial348,
which was located just a few feet to the east of
Figure 264. In situ photograph of Burial 348 coffin lid, showing

clamshell fragment (Catalog No. 1702-CL.001) near coffins left
shoulder break. Excavators found an iron nail (Catalog No. 1702CL.002) beneath the shell. Scale is in inches (photograph by Dennis
Seckler).
Burial352. This pair of artifacts was also destroyed

on September11, 2001.
Burial365, the Middle Group grave of a woman
of undetermined age, had another permutation of
shell-and-iron-artifact assemblage on her coffin lid
(Catalog No.1827-CL; Figure265). In this case, the
iron artifact was clearly not a nail, and instead of
lying underneath the oyster shell, it curved around
and nearly enclosed the shell. This oyster shell was
of a different (although unidentified) variety than
most of the oyster shells recovered from the New
York African Burial Ground. This burial is further
notable: in contrast to most of the burials at this site,
the womans head was oriented to the south rather
than the west. This womans skeletal remains may
have been displaced (see Chapter7). The shell and
the iron piece were both lost and presumed destroyed
The Early Group Burial387, of a man between 34
and 44years, may also have had shell on the coffin
Figure 265. Detail of in situ photograph of shell and iron artifact

from coffin lid of Burial 365. Scale is in inches (photograph by
Dennis Seckler).
lid, but the provenience is less certain. Field records

referred to the presence of oyster shell, including
whole upper and lower valves, without specifying
location in either text or drawing. Photographs of the
coffin lid in situ show a whole oyster shell above the
left femur. The shell was cataloged at the laboratory,
but lost and presumed destroyed on September11,
2001.
Another shell and nail (Catalog No.2071-B) were
recovered during laboratory cleaning of the skeletal
remains from Burial405, a Middle Group grave of a
child between 6 and 10years. The artifacts were both
associated with the cranial bones, although labeling
did not indicate whether they were found together or
separately.
Unlike clamshell and oyster shell, coral was exotic
to New York harbors.5 Five specimens of coral were
identified at the New York African Burial Ground,
but only one appeared to have been deliberately
included with a burial. It was recovered from the
distal femoral area of Burial376, a Late Middle
old. The specimen (Catalog No.1895-B; Figure266)
was particularly large and may have been placed on
the coffin lid at the time of burial. In keeping with
the hypothesis that relics of the ocean may have
been associated in multivalent fashion with Africa,
the Middle Passage, and the spirits of the ancestors
(Thompson 1983:135138; Thompson and Cornet
1981:197198; Vlach 1978:143), the corals place
Several cowrie shells, also exotic to New York waters, were included
in the strand of beads encircling the waist of the woman in Burial340.
They are discussed in Chapter13.
5
Figure 266. Coral (Siderastrea siderea) from Burial 376 (Catalog No.
1895-B. Weight is 190 g. Scale is in inches (photograph by Dennis
Seckler).
of origin became a clue to its spiritual, as well as

archaeological, meaning.
In 1997, the coral specimen was examined by a
series of researchers. The first investigator, Alan Harvey, Ph.D., Curator of Invertebrates at New York
Citys American Museum of Natural History, could not
identify the species, as the sample was badly degraded
and had lost its morphological structure. Subsequently,
the coral was analyzed by StevenD. Cairns, Ph.D.,
Curator of Stony Corals at the Department of Invertebrate Zoology at the New York Aquarium. He identified the genus, but species remained undetermined.
On Dr.Cairns advice, the coral specimen was sent
to IanG. Macintyre, Ph.D., Sedimentologist and
Research Specialist in the Department of Paleobiology of the Smithsonian Institution and the Museum
of Natural History, Washington, D.C. Dr.Macintyre
suspected that the coral may have been a fossil specimen when it was buried; thus he recommended that
it be examined by AnnF. Budd, Ph.D. Dr.Budd is a
Fossil Coral Taxonomist and Professor of Geology
at the University of Iowa. Dr.Budd performed a thin
section microscopy, which required that only a small
sample of the coral be sacrificed, and determined that
the coral was Siderastrea siderea, an Atlantic species
found mainly in the Caribbean, the Gulf of Mexico,
and Bermuda. It is present in a lesser degree along the
Brazilian coast, in the Gulf of Guinea, and along the
coast of West Africa. Subsequent to the analysis, the
coral specimen has gone missing and may have been
destroyed in the collapse of the World Trade Center
Pipes
Smoking pipes were found in direct association with
skeletal remains in Burial340 and in two cases that
were less clear-cut (Burials158 and 165).6
A whole, unused clay pipe was found in Burial340,
an Early Group interment of a woman between 39 and
64years of age. The pipe (Catalog No.1651-B.134;
Figure267) was placed within her coffin, beneath her
body at pelvis level. Although the pipe was unused, its
surface was rough in places. Its form is comparable to
those of British pipes of the eighteenth or early nineteenth centuries.7 The pipe may have been a personal
possession, but because it was unused, it may have
been included as a talisman or a memento. The pipe
was reburied with the womans skeletal remains in
October 2003. In addition to the pipe beneath her hips,
the woman in Burial340 was laid to rest with strands
of glass beads around her right wrist and around her
waist (see Chapter13).
Burial158 held the remains of a man 2030years
old, assigned to the cemeterys Late Group. He was
buried without a coffin, and a piece of a pipe bowl
marked IW (Catalog No.903-GF; Figure268) was
found adjacent to his right upper leg. Because only
part of the bowl was present, this artifact may not
have been a deliberate inclusion; however, the fragment could have been placed with the man because
of the mark, suggesting that the lettering may have
had some significance. Furthermore, the fragment
was positioned such that it may have been held in the
hand at the time of burial. Six additional pipe stem and
bowl fragments (with bore diameters between 5/64 and
7
/64 of an inch) were recovered from the grave fill in
this burial. All of the pipe fragments were presumed
destroyed on September11, 2001. The man was buried
wearing a matched set of gilt copper-alloy cuff links
(see Chapters12 and 13).
Fragments of pipes were found in the grave shaft fill of 72additional

burials and are considered likely to have been present in the soil matrix
rather than placed deliberately in the shaft. Their presence in the soil
suggests they may have been placed on some other burial at some
point in time during the cemeterys use, but it cannot be determined
with which individual they were originally associated. These items are
listed in the artifact inventory in AppendixE, Part3 of this volume.
Most were lost in the World Trade Center collapse.
6
Because pipes of this style spanned such a long period of manufacture,

the pipe was not considered temporally diagnostic. Other evidence in
this burial indicated that the grave was among the cemeterys Early
Group; therefore, it is assumed that the pipe dated to the early side
of this broad temporal range.
7
Figure 267. Clay pipe from Burial 340 (Catalog No. 1651-B.134).
Bore diameter is 6/64 inches (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Burial165, a coffinless Late Group burial of an

individual whose age and sex could not be determined,
contained an articulating pipe bowl and stem fragment
(Catalog No.919-B), bored at 4/64 of an inch, near the
left forearm (Figures269 and 270). This pipe was lost
and presumed destroyed on September11, 2001. Like
the other pipes in direct association with burials here,
this pipe appeared to be unused. The reason it was
placed with the deceased is not known.
Unused pipes were found in burials at Seville Plantation village in Jamaica dating between 1670 and
1760 (Armstrong 1999:181), as well as in burials at
the African settlement in Elmina, Ghana (DeCorse,
personal communication 2003). Handler (1998)
encountered at least one incidence of an undisturbed
eighteenth-century burial in Barbados in which whole,
unused pipes were placed at the chest and pelvis. It is
noteworthy that in all of these cases the pipes in the
burials had yet to be smoked.
Pipe smoking was probably very common among
African New Yorkers of both sexes. The habit can
sometimes be identified archaeologically by the presence of pipe notch dentitionworn areas created by
clutching a pipe stem between the upper and lower
teeth. Pipe notches were noted in some individuals
excavated at the New York African Burial Ground,
although not in the three with whom pipes were apparently buried.
Clay smoking pipes were ubiquitous throughout
the American colonies in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. They were mass-produced in both
England and the Netherlands, shipped overseas, and
sold inexpensively throughout the colonies. Tobacco
was smoked in West Africa by the late sixteenth century, and millions of pipes were shipped there as well
Figure 268. (a) Detail of clay pipe

bowl, showing IW mark, from
Burial 158 (Catalog No. 903-GF).
Bore diameter is 5/64 inches
(photograph by Christopher R.
DeCorse); (b) Drawing of bowl
shape.
during the period the cemetery was in use, mainly

from Dutch suppliers but also from England and
Rouen (Alpern 1995:2627). Dutch pipes predominate
in West African archaeological assemblages dated
before the nineteenth century (DeCorse 2001:164).
Doubtless, there were smokers among the captives
brought to New York, as well as among those born
in the Americas.
Pipes can be dated by shape, decoration, and makers marks (and statistically by bore diameter if large
numbers are in the sample).8 The pipes recovered
from Burials158, 165, and 340 were typical of the
eighteenth century and were all probably of English
manufacture, but exact dates and makers cannot be
assigned.
The pipes and pipe fragments recovered in association with skeletal remains and from grave shaft
fill were examined by ChristopherR. DeCorse at the
World Trade Center laboratory in 1998. Specimens
that were possibly diagnostic or that were found in
direct association with skeletal remains were brought
to Syracuse University for further analysis. A complete inventory was made, and diagnostic pieces were
photographed.
Subsequently, the pipes were returned to the World
Trade Center laboratory, and those that were clearly in
direct association with skeletal remains were prepared
Stem-bore diameters of fragments from all contexts yielded a mean

date of 1764. See AppendixE, Part3 of this volume.
8
Figure 269. In situ photograph of clay pipe stem and bowl near the
left forearm of Burial 165 (Catalog No. 919-B). Scale is in inches
Figure 270. Clay pipe stem and bowl from Burial 165 (Catalog No.
919-B). Bore diameter is 4/64 inches (photograph by Christopher
R. DeCorse).
for reburial in August 2001.9 These were shipped to
the Artex facility in Landover, Maryland, at that time.
They were placed in coffins and reburied in October
2003.
Other Items
The historical contexts for acquisition of copperalloy pins, buttons, and personal adornment items
are discussed in Chapters11, 12, and 13. These contexts pertain to the pins and small rings found with
Burial147, the banded ball found with Burial375, and
the glass sphere found with Burial410. Each of these
items or components may have been obtained through
typical channels of purchase, gift giving, recycling, or
appropriation, then reused and recontextualized, either
by the deceased during their lifetime or by whoever
prepared the body for burial.
The identification of some objects as talismans
either belonging to the deceased or bestowed upon
them at death is speculative but reasonable. Bundles
or caches of pins, buttons, crystals, smooth stones, and
other items excavated at domestic sites have been interpreted by archaeologists as conjuring items, medicinal
or protective charms, or other minkisi-type religious
paraphernalia of African derivation (see Brown and
Cooper 1990; Kelso 1984; Leone and Fry 1999; Patton
1992; Paynter etal. 2005; Russell 1997; Wilkie 1997;
for an introduction to African systems of divination,
see Peek [1991]). Such caches may have been intended
to identify the deceased, communicate with the spirit
world, or as offerings to ancestors and spirits.
Burial147, in which a bundle of pins and tiny rings
were found together, poses the strongest argument for
this practice, although other burials may have contained nonsurviving organic items placed with spiritual
intent, as well as surviving materials not obviously
recognizable as spiritual in intent. The identification of
such items is complicated by their contexts: common
household items were reused and imbued with meanings not envisioned or deciphered by manufacturers or
slaveholders. The practice remained hidden to European eyes but surely was discernable to Africans.
Clay Ball with Copper-Alloy Band

Burial375 contained a small ceramic ball (presumably a marble) with an embossed copper-alloy band
Pipes from grave shaft fill contexts remained in the laboratory, but
were not salvaged after the collapse of the World Trade Center on
September11, 2001.
9
Figure 271. Ceramic and copper-alloy sphere with band from Burial
Jon Abbott).
wrapped twice around its circumference (Catalog

No.1886-B.001; Figure271). It is one of the most
interesting and unusual artifacts found at the New
York African Burial Ground (see Figures65 and 66
in Chapter 5 for a photograph of the burial and an
in situ drawing of the object). This Middle Group
grave held the remains of a woman between 16 and
18years old. She had been placed directly in the
ground with no coffin, with her arms crossed above
her head and her legs extended. At her right hip
was a mass of cloth or leather containing the ball.
The soil immediately surrounding the object was
not sampled. The omission makes it impossible to
ascertain whether the ball was part of an assemblage
of material that included botanical, faunal, or mineral
elements. Such assemblages are usually contained
within bundles, bags, or other wrappings, and are
well known in African American ethnographic and
historical accounts. No comparable artifact has been
documented in the literature.10
Cluster of Rings and Pins

Burial147 was a Late Group grave of a man between
55 and 65years old, buried with a group of straight
pins and small copper-alloy rings (Catalog No.892B.004) between his right humerus and rib cage (Figure272). Four pins, three of which were precisely
aligned along the arm bone, and 14rings were counted
Spheres have been recovered from African American archaeological
sites such as the W.E.B. DuBois birthplace in Great Barrington,
Massachusetts (Paynter etal. 2005), although the copper banding is
unique to this artifact. The 20-mm-diameter ceramic marble from the
DuBois site was of a type produced in Europe in the eighteenth century
and may have been chosen for its magic or spiritual properties.
10
Figure 273. Copper-alloy rings from Burial 147 (Catalog No. 0892B.004). Diameters are 11 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 272. Detail from in situ drawing of Burial

147, showing three pins aligned along the
inside of the right humerus, an adjacent pin on
the right scapula, and a cluster of copper-alloy
rings (diameters are 11 mm) between the upper
arm and the rib cage. Scale is 1 inch = 6 inches
during excavation; many of the observed fragments

were too deteriorated to remove, and it is probable
that many of the pieces were not collected. Although
the field drawing clearly shows 14rings, conservators recovered only enough fragments to reconstruct
an arbitrary seven rings, each measuring 11mm in
diameter (Figure273). The fragments were stabilized chemically and by mounting on a linen backing
(LaRoche 2002).
At the time of burial, the rings were probably
enclosed in a cloth pocket or sack pinned to the sleeve
of the mans burial garment (see Chapter 11 for a
discussion of shrouding). The group of pins and rings
is considered a possible talisman or conjuring bundle
of some kind.11 No soil samples were collected from
this part of his body; thus it could not be determined
whether textile fragments or botanical remains were
a part of the cache.
Concealing amulets on the body was (and is) a documented practice in many African cultures and in the
The assemblage calls to mind a luck ball, well documented in
African American contexts (Hyatt 1935:799; Puckett 1926:229234).
Luck balls have been common forms of conjuration for many years and
are well known among present-day Africans and African Americans
as well (Handloff 1982:186187, 189).
African Diaspora. Handloff (1982:186189) has noted

the practice as having been used both historically and
at the present in the Ivory Coast, including a reference
to protective bracelets worn on the upper arms. During
the nineteenth century, Asante warriors wore armbands
called kapo, which were akin to bansare armbands
worn in spiritual practice (McCaskie 2000).
Glass Sphere
A tiny, amber-colored glass sphere (Catalog No.2082B.001; Figure274) was recovered during laboratory
cleaning of the skeletal remains from Burial410, a
Middle Group burial of a woman of unknown age.
The exact location of the sphere was not recorded.
The object was not perfectly spherical and may have
been from a piece of jewelry, although no evidence
of a setting was noted with this burial.
Knives
Two individuals, from Burial214 and Burial48, had
parts of knives in association with their remains.
11
Figure 274. Glass sphere from Burial 410 (Catalog No. 2082-B.001).
Diameter is 3.44 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 275. In situ drawing of Burial

214, showing artifact locations.
Scale is 1 inch = 1 foot; north is to
the right (drawing by M. Schur).
Figure 276. In situ photograph of knife

handle (Catalog No. 1191-B.005) and
coin (Catalog No. 1191-B.003) from
the left pelvic/forearm area of Burial
214. The coin is visible above the
right side of the knife handle, lying
on a fragment of coffin wood. Scale
is in inches (photograph by Dennis
Seckler).
Burial214, a Late Group grave of a man between

45 and 55years, held a bone or antler and iron knife
handle (Catalog No.1191-B.005) about 8.5cm long
in close association with a single copper coin (Catalog No.1191-B.003; see previous description of coin
in this chapter; see Figure259). Both artifacts were
recovered from his left pelvic area or forearm, perhaps
indicating that they were enclosed in a pocket (Figures275 and 276). Douglas Armstrongs excavation
of house-yard burials at Seville Plantation in Jamaica
also found an example of a man, presumed to have
been a captive plantation worker, buried with a knife
in his left hand, perhaps similar to the placement of the
knife in Burial214 (Armstrong 1999:181; Armstrong
and Fleischman 1993).
Conservators did not treat the knife handle, as it
had been collected and sent to the laboratory along
with the coffin nails. The handle was of bone or antler,
the shank of iron (Figure277).
Figure 277. Knife handle of bone or antler and iron, from Burial
214 (Catalog No. 1191-B.005). Length is 85 mm (photograph by
Jon Abbott).
A knife blade (Catalog No.620-CHC) was found

in association with Burial48, an Early Group grave
of an adult of undetermined age. It was originally
identified as a probable nail, but the X-ray revealed a

of age. The crystal was forwarded to the conservation staff, then to the American Museum of Natural
History, where Mr.Sydney Horenstein identified it
as nonlocal calcite. The nearest sources of similar
crystalline calcite are north of Kingston, New York,
or west of the Delaware River. It is also possible
this crystal originated elsewhere, perhaps outside of
North America. It is not possible to know whether
the item was placed with the deceased or contained
in the grave-fill soil.
A quartz disk (Catalog No.1321-B.004; Figure280) was recovered during laboratory cleaning
of the remains in Burial289, a Late-Middle grave of
a child between 5 and 9years. Because the disk was
found in direct association with the skeletal remains,
it was probably deliberately placed in the childs
grave. According to laboratory technicians, the stone
appeared to have been cleaved rather than flaked;
Figure 278. X-ray of iron knife blade from Burial 48 (Catalog No.
620-CHC), shown at actual size (image courtesy of John Milner
Associates).
likely blade (Figure278). The item was not salvaged

following the collapse of the World Trade Center on
September11, 2001.
Calcite Crystal, Quartz Disc, and

Mica Schist Fragment
Laboratory personnel found a very small calcite
crystal (Catalog No.0792-B.003; Figure279) while
cleaning the skeletal remains from Burial55, a Middle
Group interment of a child between 3 and 5years
Figure 279. Calcite-crystal cluster from Burial 55 (Catalog No. 0792B.003). Width is 3.5 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
Figure 280. Rose quartz disk from Burial 289 (Catalog No. 1321B.004). Diameter is 7 mm (photograph by Jon Abbott).
however, the flat, round shape may be the result of

intentional modification rather than natural processes.
Small stone or ceramic pieces were sometimes shaped
into discs for use as game pieces; such items have
been recovered archaeologically from colonial-era
sites with an African presence, including the Broad
Street site in New York City (Wall 2000) and the Isaac
Royall House in Medford, Massachusetts (Royall
House Association 1994). Alternatively, the disk may
have been from a piece of jewelry, perhaps like the
glass-and-wire-filigree ornament found with the infant
in Burial186 (see Chapter13).
A small mica schist disk (Catalog No.880-B) was
recovered in the laboratory from within the soil pedestal of Burial135, a Late Group interment of a man
between 30 and 40years of age (Figure281). The
circular piece measured 6mm in diameter. Although
Figure 281. Mica schist disk from Burial 135 (Catalog No. 880-B).
it was very small and its exact provenience was not

recorded, the disk may have been a game piece or perhaps a flash placed for its reflective quality symbolic
of water. In addition to the mica disc, Burial135 held
two copper coins, which were probably set over each
eye. The multivalent secular-plus-spiritual purposes
of the coins on the eyes reinforce the possibility that
the mica disk may have been intended to attract the
attention of African spirits.
Crockery
A large piece from a salt-glazed stoneware vessel
with a blue spiral design (Catalog No.1589-GF) was
found on the lid of the hexagonal coffin in Burial328,
a Middle Group burial of a woman between 40 and
50years of age (Figure282). The portion of the site
where she was interred was apparently cleared by
backhoe to the tops of coffins, damaging them and
compromising the eighteenth-century-era ground
surface. Nonetheless, this vessel fragment appeared

to have been deliberately placed on the coffin lid,
approximately level with the shoulder break. This
area would have been directly over the womans
upper torso. There is abundant ethnohistorical, ethnographic, and archaeological evidence for this practice
from West and West Central Africa (see Agorsah etal.
1999:57; David 1992:197; DeCorse, 1999:148,
2001:101, 155, 157, 189; Denbow 1999:405) and
from mainland North America (Brown 2001:90;
Deetz 1996:206210; Gundaker 2001:130; Jamieson
1995:4951; Schuyler 1972:26; Thompson 1983:184;
Thompson and Cornet 1981:7694, 182185; Vlach
1978:139145).
Sherds from similar pots with identical designs
were common in the grave fill and in the industrial
features throughout the southeastern portion of the
New York African Burial Ground. Therefore, we
are reasonably certain that the pot was produced by
the Crolius-Remmey potters on Pot Bakers Hill (see
AppendixF, Part3 of this volume:PlatesF.21 and
F.29). The stoneware pot from Burial328 was missing at the time of the final New York African Burial
Ground artifact inventory; it was not included in the
analysis of the local stoneware from grave shafts and
was never photographed in the laboratory.
As mentioned, a copper-alloy coin was recovered
from a disturbed context within this burial (see Footnote4, earlier in this chapter). A fragment of kiln
furniture was also found in the burial, lying directly
on the lumbar vertebrae.
Nails and Tacks

Nails and tacks that did not appear to be from coffin
construction were found with four individuals: Buri-
Figure 282. In situ photograph of stoneware

vessel fragment, Burial 328 (Catalog No.
1589-GF). North is at the top (photograph by
Dennis Seckler).

als138, 186, 197, and 310. The individuals in these
burials had all been buried in coffins. Two of the
burials with noncoffin nails and tacks were of infants
or young children, and two were of relatively older
(within this population) women.
Burials197 and 310, both women in their forties or
fifties, were buried in overlapping coffins adjacent to
or crossing the projected fence line. The field drawing
for Burial310, a Middle group interment, illustrates
seven tacks12 between the proximal tibiae, loose but
not widely scattered. Four tacks were identified in
the laboratory, cataloged, and ultimately reburied
with the womans remains. Six other iron artifacts,
listed as possible multiple tacks, were set aside to be
X-rayed but were lost on September11, 2001. The
woman in this grave also wore a copper-alloy ring
with glass insets on her left hand (see Chapter13) and
was positioned with her right arm crooked as though
holding a child, although no other skeletal remains
were present in the grave.
The field drawing for Burial197, a Late Group
interment, showed two small round iron objects placed
rather precisely between the ankles. Laboratory personnel cataloged three possible tack fragments, which
were lost on September11, 2001, and thus not X-rayed
for definitive identification. It is presumed that these
three fragments included the two from the ankles.
Burial138, a Late Group interment of a child
aged between 3 and 5years, held four tacks scattered
throughout the coffin: one at the headboard, one at the
right foot, and two found during laboratory cleaning
of the skeletal remains.
An iron artifact, tentatively identified as a nail,
was recovered from the left side of the cranium of
Burial186, a Late Group interment of a neonate or
very young infant. The nail was in a provenience
inconsistent with the coffins construction (although
it could have become displaced during the coffins
decomposition). The infants head was also adorned
with a glass disk set in a filigree of copper alloy (see
Chapter13).
Conservation treatment was limited to desalination
and, in some cases, X-rays. After this processing,
the tacks were forwarded to the Howard University
laboratory.
The exact count was uncertain because several iron pieces, believed
to have been tacks, had rusted together into an unidentified mass. This
accumulation was slated to be X-rayed, but was lost on September11,
2001.
12
Ox Shoe
An iron mass later identified as a partial ox shoe or
horseshoe (Catalog No.0286-UNC.001) was recovered
from a somewhat unclear provenience in Burial15,
a Late Group burial of a child or adolescent between
11 and 18years old. The artifact was found adjacent
to the remains of the right leg; however, this grave
had been disturbed and the skeletal remains truncated
by later foundation construction, and the artifact lay
at the interface between the grave and the construction trench (Figure283), making the association of
individual and artifact tentative at best.
Conservators cleaned the artifact in deionized water
and removed some corrosion with a petroleum-distillate sequestering agent. X-rays revealed the item
more clearly (Figure284). The drawing based on
the X-rays (Figure285) depicts a morphology that is
consistent with either an ox shoe or a horseshoe. It is
similar to examples of horseshoes dating to the seventeenth through mid-eighteenth centuries (Nol Hume
1969:238) and to ox shoes recovered from Revolutionary War encampments in the New York area (Calver
and Bolton 1950:218219). One of the rectangular
holes still contained a hand-wrought nail.
Horseshoes are a frequent component of grave
surface decoration, and examples are known from
African American contexts in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. In addition to this association with
the grave, horseshoes are commonly used as lucky
devices among Europeans and European Americans
as well as African Americans.
Peach Pit
Excavators recovered a peach (Prunus persica) pit
from the coffin lid of Burial217, a Late Group grave
of a young man between 17 and 19years old. The pit
was collected in a wood sample and not noted in the
field records, so excavators may have mistaken it for
part of the coffin wood.
The pit was probably a deliberate inclusion rather
than intrusive. It is unlikely that peach trees grew on
the site during its tenure as a cemetery, as neither the
pollen nor macrobotanical analyses turned up any other
evidence of this species at the site. The grave fill shows
no evidence of household dumping in the immediate
vicinity, and the pit was directly upon the coffin lid.
Peach pits are a common component of African
American conjuration bundles. Their use has been
documented in the southern United States (Puckett
1926:437; Ruppel etal. 2003:326).
Figure 284. X-ray of ox shoe from Burial 15 (Catalog No. 0286UNC.001) (image courtesy of John Milner Associates).
Figure 283. Iron ox shoe (adjacent to trowel

handle at left side of photograph) at Burial 15
(Catalog No. 0286-UNC.001). North is to the right
Possible Floral Tributes

Results of the analyses of pollen and macroplant
remains from selected soil samples are presented in
AppendixG, Part3 of this volume. In this section, we
summarize the possible evidence for flowers having
been placed in graves as a component of funerary
observance, based on the presence of pollen from
flowering species. Table58 lists the burials for which
such evidence is considered. Macroplant remains
(seeds) recovered from flotation or in the field have not
been analyzed as possible evidence for flowers.13
Several burials contained honewort (Cryptotaenia
canadensis) pollen in the stomach soil samples. The
variety that grows in the New York area is not widely
Seeds that were observed and recovered during excavation (as
opposed to those recovered by flotation) were never identified as to
plant speciesthey were lost in the destruction of the World Trade
Center on September11, 2001. Pollen was analyzed for soil samples
from only 28graves, including 62total samples from coffin-lid,
stomach-area, and control samples. Distinct spectra between control
and either lid or stomach-area samples was considered as possible
evidence that plants had been placed with the deceased (or had been
ingested). A full explanation of the methods and results of palynology
is provided in AppendixG.2, Part3 of this volume.
13
Figure 285. Drawing of ox shoe from Burial 15. Length is 3.5 inches
(drawing by C. LaRoche and R. Schultz).
utilized for medical purposes; therefore, it is most

likely evidence of floral tributes placed in or on the
coffins. Honewort may have grown wild at the burial
ground and could have been gathered there.
Burials that contained high relative percentages of
honewort pollen included Burial45 (a Middle Group
grave of a very young child), Burial115 (a Middle
Group grave of a woman between 25 and 35years
of age), Burial151 (a Late Group grave of a man
between 35 and 45years), Burial210 (another Late
Group grave of a man between 35 and 45), Burial270
(a Middle Group burial of an adult man whose age
was not determined), and Burial392 (a Late-Middle
Group burial of a man in his early forties to early fifties who was laid head-to-east in a rectangular coffin,
wearing breeches and possibly a shirt).
Honewort flowers between June and September,
which suggests that these burials took place during
the summer months. Most were of men who were
middle aged for their time. It is possible there was a

Table 58. Burials with Possible Floral Tributes
Burial
No.
Age
(years)
Sex
Temporal
Group
45
2.54.5
undetermined
Middle
pollen of thorough wax, Queen Annes lace, honewort
115
2535
female
Middle
honewort
151
3545
male
Late
honewort
194
3040
male
Late
chicory-type (Liguliflorae) pollen; this bouquet may have

been gathered at the cemetery itself
210
3545
male
Late
honewort
270
adult
male
Middle
honewort
392
42.552.5
male
Late-Middle
honewort
Pollen Evidence
Note: See Appendix G in Part 3 of this Volume.
preference for inclusion of flowers in the burials of

older men.
Burial45, a Middle Group interment of a child
between 2.5 and 4.5years old, contained an assortment
of pollen species that included honewort, thorough
wax (Bupleurum rotundifolium), and several genera
of carrot family (Apiaceae) pollen, which probably
included Queen Annes lace (Datura carota). These
species are all flowering plants that grow wild in the
New York City vicinity. Based on the flowering season
of the plants represented here, the child probably died
during the summer.
Burial194, a Late Group grave of a man between
30 and 40years, contained a comparatively high
level of chicory-type (Liguliflorae) pollen in the soil
samples taken from the stomach and lid areas. The
pollen may have been associated with the consumption
of chicory leaves, which resemble dandelion greens,
shortly before death. However, because plant pollen

is associated with flowers rather than leaves, it seems
more likely that it represents a floral tribute, perhaps
gathered at the cemetery and placed on the coffin at
burial.14 Chicory-type plants are common wildflowers
that inhabit a range of areas and soil conditions that
were probably present at the site. If the pollen recovered was from a floral tribute, the deceased most likely
was buried sometime between May and September,
when this species normally blooms. This burial is
also notable for the cedar plank attached to the coffin
headboard as a grave marker (see Chapter9).
It is assumed that coffins were already sealed when they arrived

at the burial ground; thus, if the plants were gathered at the site, they
must have been placed on, rather than in, the coffin. The high pollen
content in the stomach area may have been from grains that filtered
downward as the coffin and soft tissue decomposed.
14
Chapter 15
Summary and Conclusions

Warren R. Perry, Jean Howson, and Barbara A. Bianco
The New York African Burial Ground, located in

lower Manhattan, New York City and County, proved
to be the largest excavated African cemetery from
colonial America and contained the largest sample of
human skeletal remains ever studied from any African Diaspora cemetery, anywhere. The total number
of graves identified in the excavated portion of the
cemetery was 424, and the total number of individuals for whom skeletal remains could be inventoried
numbered 419.
The area investigated archaeologically during
19911992 represents but a fractionless than 4percentof the cemeterys estimated original extent.
Although the maximum footprint of the African Burial
Ground is not known, the total area designated a
National Historic Landmark in 1993 is approximately
7acres, nearly 305,000square feet. In contrast, the
portion of the archaeological site where burials were
excavated encompassed about 9,500square feet. The
site was located on Block154, bounded on the north
by Duane Street, on the south by Reade Street, on
the west by Broadway, and on the east by Elk Street.
Block154 is now home to the 290Broadway Federal
Office Building and to a small, publicly accessible
part of the cemetery where unexcavated graves are
protected. The publicly accessible area is where the
reinterment of the excavated remains was held in
October 2003. This area memorializes all of the men,
women, and children laid to rest at the African Burial
Ground.
For much of the colonial period, New York City
had a higher proportion of Africans in its population
than any other urban center except Charleston, South
Carolina. Nearly all African city residents lived under
enslavement until after the Revolutionary War. Most
would likely have been interred in the African Burial
Ground, which was in use until 1795. Although no
documentation about the cemeterys opening has come
to light, the African Burial Ground may have originated

as early as the middle of the seventeenth century and
no later than the beginning of the eighteenth century;
it may have contained 15,000 or more graves.
The occupants of the graves that were excavated
archaeologically constitute a large sample but cannot
be assumed to be statistically representative of the
entire cemetery population. Further archaeological
excavation that could provide information about the
majority of the individuals once interred in the entire
African Burial Ground is not likely to be undertaken.
Additions to the thin documentary record on the African Burial Ground may someday come to light, but
for now, the skeletal and nonskeletal remains from the
excavated site provide a unique window on Manhattans African community during the colonial and early
federal periods.
Here we summarize the key archaeological findings
presented in this report. We revisit the research agenda
and the archaeological methods used to address it. We
then review the findings and their implications and
identify topics for future study.
Ancestors, Descendants, and

the Research Agenda
Howard Universitys New York African Burial Ground
project is a bioarchaeological investigation conducted
by multidisciplinary teams of archaeologists, bioanthropologists, and historians with expertise on Africa
and the African Diaspora. Inaugurated in 1993 under
a contract with the U.S. General Services Administration, the projects investigation of the cemetery is an
outcome of public intervention.
Archaeologists, bioanthropologists, and historians
are accountable to their peers and professional asso-
368 Warren R. Perry, Jean Howson, and Barbara A. Bianco

ciations but also to their ethical clientsthe people
whose lives we study and the descendant communities
our studies impact. Members of the descendant community and their allies were steadfastly committed to
ensuring that the skeletal remains uncovered at the site
were treated respectfully and reinterred with dignity,
that African American scholars were appointed to
direct the scientific study, and that the realities of
enslavement in colonial Manhattan be brought to
wide public attention.1 Howard Universitys New
York African Burial Ground project owes much to the
vigilance of African Americans and others who wanted
to learn the truth about their urban predecessors and
to recover a history that has been hidden for centuries.
Their intervention was a crucial and deciding factor
in how the projects research agenda was designed
and implemented.
Four overarching topics of concern to the descendent community were identified during public hearings.
These topics included the cultural and geographical origins of the men, women, and children whose
remains were uncovered at the cemetery; the quality
of their lives under captivity; the ways they resisted
enslavement; and the transformation from African to
African Americanin other words, the ways they
made new identities and formed new communities.
The language of this report as well as its scope and
substance addresses the concerns of the descendent
community. The African American descendant community is multidimensional and ideologically heterogeneous. Even so, all felt that the term slave was
insulting and outdated and expressed a strong preference for the use of captive Africans to describe the
individuals laid to rest at the African Burial Ground.
The term captive African differs substantially from
the word slave. Captive used as an adjective rather
than a noun avoids denoting the condition under which
people lived as if it alone defined their identity. As a
mark of respect for the African American community,
whose members have the greatest right to speak for
the black population of New Amsterdam/New York,
the researchers under Howard Universitys auspices
refer to the ancestors with a phrase their descendants
have chosen.
Location and Dating of

the Excavated Site
Standard archaeological methods were used to turn
the material record into information that might speak
to the research agenda. Our first methodological task
as historical archaeologists was to sort out the spatial
and temporal dimensions of the excavated site. This
involved systematizing the excavation and laboratory
records, reconstructing the stratigraphic position of each
grave, and charting the development of the cemetery
during and after its use as a burial ground (see Chapters13 and the site map, Figure7, pocket map).
The historic African Burial Ground was situated at
the edge of the Collect Pond, on the once-northerly
outskirts of New Amsterdam/New York.2 Farms
owned by Africans and Europeans were established
in the area in the 1640s. The cemetery may date
back to that time. Although graves in the excavated
portion may span much of the cemeterys period
of use, it is not possible to determine whether the
earliest generations of captive Africans who labored
in colonial Manhattan were interred within the excavated site.
The excavated site, which was in the northern part
of the historic African Burial Ground, overlapped a
former fence line that once separated the Van Borsum
patent from the Calk Hook Farm; these two parcels
of land were granted to Dutchmen during the second
half of the seventeenth century. By the mid-eighteenth
century, the Van Borsum patent had come to be known
as the Negroes Burial Ground.
The excavated site, and the cemetery as a whole,
was dramatically impacted by several phases of development, civic and private, industrial and residential.
The excavated site included a portion of the cemetery
that was very densely used and a portion that was relatively thinly used (south and north of the fence line,
respectively). It is possible the cemetery grew in area
during its early period and then contracted during the
second half of the eighteenth century as various kinds
of development encroached. After 1730, factories
such as the Crolius and Remmey pottery; institutions
The location near water may have held spiritual significance for some
of the African people who used the burial ground. In some coastal
West African and West Central African communities, cemeteries were
associated with bodies of water where spirits are believed to reside
(Ferguson 1992, 1999; Samford 1994; Thompson 1983:135138;
Thompson and Cornet 1981:197198).
2
The New York African Burial Ground project has an Office of

Public Education and Interpretation that informs and involves the
public in the scientific research. Based in New York City, the office is
supported and operated under the auspices of the GSA. It was headed
until September 2005 by Dr.Sherrill Wilson.
1
Chapter 15 . Conclusion 369

such as a military barracks, an almshouse, and a jail;
and residential construction including houses, fences,
and outbuildings encroached upon the cemetery. With
this encroachment, the density of interments and
the superimposition of graves within the remaining
ground would have increased.
After 1795, intensive, full-scale development covered the area, damaging or destroying some of the
graves and bypassing others. Mechanical stripping
of the site down to grave shaft outlines or, worse, the
tops of coffins themselves, resulted in further loss
of the original ground surface during the construction of the 290Broadway Federal Office Building
in 1991. This may have obliterated irreplaceable
material evidence of early African American burial
practices.
Relative and absolute dating of the graves was
complicated by the paucity of material culture found
in direct association with the skeletal remains and
from within the grave shafts. We therefore used a
combination of factors to establish relative temporal
groups. Burials were assigned to one of four temporal
groups based on physical features (fence lines and
concentrated areas of pottery waste), artifact dating,
burial stratigraphy and spatial patterning, and coffin
shape (see Chapter4).
The Early Group (n=51) included adults with
four-sided coffins that tapered toward the foot and
the children associated with the adults. Many of the
graves underlay, and some were truncated by, ensuing burials. Early Group burials seem to predate the
heavy dumping of kiln waste from nearby potteries,
which were in operation by 1730.
Most burials (n=256) lacked strong evidence
for earlier or later assignment, and thus were placed
in a Middle Group (n=198) or Late-Middle Group
(n=58). Stratigraphic relationships, and occasionally artifacts from grave shafts or coffins, were the
primary criteria for inclusion in the Late-Middle
Group. Because the temporal assignments are based
on relative factors, the list of burials in the middle
groups cannot be considered definitive or absolute.
This holds especially true for children. The higher
proportion of children in the Middle Group probably indicates that some of these childrens graves
should be assigned to the Late-Middle Group or
even to the Late Group, but there is no way to sort
out which ones.
Assignment to the Late Group (n=114) was based
on location north of the former boundary fence (which
apparently stood until the British occupation of the
city during the Revolutionary War) and/or the presence

of artifacts with a terminus post quem of similar or
later dates; in a few cases, stratigraphic relationships
to other burials was a determining factor. The removal
of the fence is used to date the Late Group.
Burial Practices within the

Excavated Site
Our second methodological task was to examine
patterns in burial practice for the site as a whole as
well as within and across each temporal group (Chapters59). What was typical and what was unusual in
how African New Yorkers interred their communitys
dead? Seven aspects of burial practice were examined:
coffin use, grave orientation, body position, individual vs. co-interment, burial attire, the presence of
adornment and other possessions or goods, and grave
markers. In addition, we also looked at the cemeterys
internal geography. Were the graves of men, women,
and children arranged in configurations or distributed
evenly? Was there any patterning along gender or
generational lines?
Four of these variables showed remarkable homogeneity regardless of the deceaseds age, sex, or temporal group assignment. These include coffin use
(91.6percent), body orientation with the head to the
west (97.8percent), extended supine body position
(100percent), and predominantly individual burial.
Only two coffins contained more than one individual,
and relatively few grave shafts were shared.
We think shrouding of the dead may also have been
typical. Small, copper-alloy straight pins with wirewound heads were among the most numerous artifacts
recovered in direct association with the deceased
only coffin remains (see Chapter10) outnumbered
pins. Straight pins were observed in and/or recovered
from half of the burials. In the absence of cloth or any
evidence for street clothes, the use of winding sheets
or shrouds without durable fasteners may reasonably
be inferred (see Chapter11).
The case for grave markers as a typical burial
practice is unclear. Grave markers were observed in
the southwest corner of the excavated site, an area
where the original ground surface was still intact.
Grave markers took the form of smooth stone cobbles
(arranged on the ground in lines and, in one case, an
arc, so as to demarcate a grave or possibly groups of
graves) and of rectangular stone slabs (placed verti-

cally at the heads of the graves). Because such markers
were found in the one area where their preservation
was possible, we think it is likely that markers were
used elsewhere at the cemetery. It is likely that a
vertical wood post attached to the headboard of a
coffin marked a grave (Burial297) in the northern
part of the site; presumably, the post extended above
the ground.
Relatively few individuals appear to have been buried in street clothing (indicated by the types and locations of buttons and cuff links directly associated with
the skeletal remains). Personal adornment and other
goods were also unusual. Among the items recovered
were glass beads (nine of which were likely manufactured in western Africa); finger rings and metal
jewelry; and coins, shells, pipes, and unique objects
such as a small ceramic ball with an embossed metal
band. It is also possible that floral tributes had been
placed in a few of the graves (Chapters1214).
Most burials were placed within a foot or two of
neighboring graves, but the internal geography of the
excavated site was not uniform. In addition to shared
grave shafts, there were several locations where burials appeared either to have been clustered together or
placed in possible rows.
The shared or possible shared grave shafts (n=27)
held two (but sometimes three) individuals, typically
infants or young children (n=12) or an infant or a
child with an adult (n=12 or 13). In some cases,
the individuals in shared or possible shared grave
shafts appear to have been interred at the same time;
in other cases, there may have been an interval after
which a second burial was placed in a grave shaft
already in use.
Burial clusters encompassed individuals from different age groups (infants and young children interred
near adults) as well as child burials and, occasionally, pairs of adults. Possible rows of graves (aligned
roughly north-to-south) were easiest to discern in
the northern part of the site, although some of these
apparent rows may have extended all the way to the
sites southern edge.
In the northern part of the site, where graves were
not as crowded as elsewhere, burial practices as well
as the demographic profile were somewhat distinct.
There was a preponderance of men, and almost all
of the coffinless burials were in this area. Clothing
fasteners were more frequent, as were goods such as
coins, knives, and pipes. We think that burial practices
in this area reflect both a shorter period of use and a
response to the demographic displacement and social
privation that accompanied the Revolutionary War.

There was a large influx of fugitive Africans during
the British occupation, followed by a mass exodus
after the British troops decamped. With the exception
of the northern part of the site, the graves of men,
women, and children were distributed more or less
evenly across the excavated space.
Differences in burial practices for men and women
were not observed. Although men were more likely
than women to have been buried without coffins, we
attribute this to the increased presence of men during
the Revolutionary War. Buttons were more typically
associated with men, but because workingwomens
clothing from that era seldom fastened with buttons,
it is not possible to state that men were more likely to
be buried in street clothes. Pollen representing possible floral tributes was identified with more men than
women, but the sample is too small to generalize from.
The two south-headed burials for which sex could be
determined held women; the four east-headed burials
held either men or children.
Burial practices for adults and children differed in
some ways. All children had coffins (with the exception of one infant who was buried in the arms of a
woman), even in the northern part of the site, where
numerous adults had none. The shapes of childrens
coffins appear to have varied throughout the sites
entire time span; in contrast, adult coffins were more
uniform once the shoulder-shaped variety was adopted
(from the Middle Group on). One possible explanation
is that childrens coffins were more likely to be made
by families rather than purchased. Pins were present
in all age groups, but they were observed in a higher
percentage of childrens graves than adults graves.
Many adults had pins on the cranium only, which
was much less common proportionally for children.
Some infants had pins along their entire bodies, and
a purely functional explanation is unlikely. It is possible pins had a special role in the ritual preparation
of the bodies of youngsters.
Buttons were not found with children, but, as was
the case with women, some pins may have fastened
childrens clothes. Adornment was just as likely to be
found on children as on women (beads and rings) and
men (decorative buttons and cuff links). Glass beads,
a silver pendant, and a glass-and-metal-filigree ornament were recovered with young children and infants.
Unlike adults, children could not have obtained adornments on their own; childrens adornments had to
have been gifts from adults, whether bestowed in
life or at death.
Individuals and Communities

Variation in burial practice at a public cemetery in use
for a century or more is not unexpected, particularly
in a cemetery serving an urban community that continually absorbed newcomers from a wide range of
cultures and places. Yet the scope of variation at the
African Burial Ground was narrow. Viewed from the
excavated site, a typical or proper burial in African
New Amsterdam/New York entailed a coffin large
enough to hold a supine, extended body that was probably covered with a shroud and placed head-to-west
in a grave of its own.
We had assumed that a proper burial would have
multiple configurations, because no documentary
evidence about municipal or outsider oversight of
the cemetery came to light. Municipal codes enacted
during the 1720s and 1730s specified the time and
size of black funerals but carried no stipulations
about coffin use, grave orientation, burial attire, or
the positioning of the corpse. No evidence indicating
that white New Yorkers played a role at the gravesides in the African Burial Ground has been found
(see Chapter2).
It seems, however, that black New Yorkers may
have arrived at a provisional consensus about how
to deal with death early on.3 The consistency in the
archaeological record suggests that a model of a proper
burial was in place by the time the graves in the excavated portion of the cemetery had been interred. Conformity can be seen in the context of the individuals
relationship to family and to the larger community.
Funerals were communal and public expressions of
loss, transformation, and restoration, and the cemetery
provided a space where such rituals could help to forge
a developing African American identity.
It is clear, though, that the concept of a proper burial
was elastic enough to accommodate the expression of
individuality. Consider, for example, four distinctive
interments in the excavated portion of the African
Burial Ground. Each of the individuals (in Burials340,
22, 101, and 147, one from each of our temporal
groups), had a coffin, was probably shrouded, had
been laid with the head to the west, and was in a grave
of his or her own. Each also had skeletal indicators
of work, illness, or nutritional stress that remind us
of their likely common lot as captive laborers in an
The author thanks Grey Gundaker for articulating the idea of a

provisional consensus with reference to burial practices.
3
eighteenth-century city.4 Each, however, was buried

with distinctive items.
Burial340, an Early Group grave of a woman
between 39 and 64years old, was buried with an
African-style strand of beads around her waist. Her
molecular genetic affinities point to West Africa,
and her incisors were modified, suggesting African
nativitybut skeletal evidence suggests a later life
of hard labor and possible nutritional stress. Although
skeletal preservation was generally poor, the bones
showed several pathologies, including scarring on the
femurs where the muscles attached and hypertrophy
(the enlargement of an area of bone probably caused
by repeated stress) on the scapulae and ulnae (shoulders and lower arms). Moderate osteoarthritis affected
the hip and the vertebrae of the neck and lower back,
and there was possible evidence of anemia in the
cranial bone.
This womans distinctive African-style adornment
seems to bespeak her commitment to her cultural
ancestry. 5 Womens waist beads, associated as they are
with femininity, sexuality, and female friendship, are
recognizable as a form of adornment that had a wide
geographical spread in western and central Africa.
Burial22, a Middle Group grave of a child between
2.5 and 4.5years old, was found with a shell (clam, of
a species native to New York waters) located above
the left collarbone. Perhaps the shell was placed in
the coffin by mourners for its association with water,
to mark the ritual transformation of the childs status via an analogy between crossing through water
and crossing from life to death. The use of shells in
this manner is known from Africa and the African
Diaspora. The child in Burial22 was probably born in
New York, and strontium isotope levels measured in
the teeth support this assumption, as they fell within
the narrow range of the other young children in the
sample tested. During his or her short life, the child
suffered from an infection or an injury that left scars
on the bones of the lower and upper limbs.
The Howard University Skeletal Biology Team provided information
on skeletal pathologies and on genetic and chemical analyses.
4
Although there appears to have been a substantial break in the

continuity of waist-bead wearing in the African Diaspora, waist
beads have in recent years become fashionable among some Africandescendent women in the United States as a way of reclaiming and
proclaiming their African identities. A similar practice may be the
African American nation sack, a bundle or bag of varied materials
worn on a string around a womans waist. A nation sack is intended
to protect the wearer rather than to ornament her. It is worn beneath
the clothing and is seen only occasionally by close female kin, never
by men.
5

The coffin that held the child straddled two underlying adult burials, one of a woman (Burial46) and the
other of a probable man (Burial29). The child and
the adults were part of a cluster of graves bordered
by a row of white cobblestones, apparently watersmoothed rocks. This style of grave marking has been
observed throughout the African Diaspora over a broad
temporal span. The relationship of the child to others
in the community probably guided the placement of
the grave within this cluster.
Burial101, of a man in his early thirties, was
assigned to the Late-Middle Group. Lead levels in
his teeth were consistent with African birth, although
strontium isotope levels overlapped the ranges of
both American and African birth. Preservation of the
skeleton was excellent, and several pathologies were
observed, including bone scarring owing to inflammation from bacterial infection or injury on the cranium
and legs. The muscle attachments at the mans elbows
were enlarged from stress, mild to severe arthritis
affected his joints, layers of his teeth indicated that
he experienced nutritional stress in childhood, and
cavities were severe (he probably had abscesses and
perhaps infections of the surrounding bone). The tibiae
were malformed consistent with a condition called
saber shin, suggesting he had yaws.
This mans coffin lid was decorated with a heartshaped design formed of tinned or silvered iron tacks
with an interior pattern formed of smaller tacks.6
Heart-shaped decorations may not have evoked the
same meanings for Africans as for Europeans. The
coffin design may have called to mind the Sankofa
symbol (Figure286) that originated with the Akan
people of Ghana and the Ivory Coast; the symbol
Figure 286. One version of the
West African Sankofa symbol
(source: MacDonald 2005).
refers to of the need to remember ones ancestors

(Chapter8).7 If the mourners who interred the man
in Burial101 viewed the heart-shaped decoration as
a Sankofa symbol, then the design on the coffin lid
would provide evidence of the portability of expressive culture and its importance to cultural survival.
The multivalence of a familiar sign provided the
opportunity to incorporate an African symbol into a
funeral observance.
Burial147, one of the Late Group graves, held
the remains of one of the oldest individuals in the
excavated sample, a man between 55 and 65years old
when he died. His arm and leg bones had scarring from
infection or injury, and the sites of muscle attachments
were enlarged from repeated stress. Moderate to severe
osteoarthritis affected all of the major joint complexes
and the spine. Porous bones of the cranium and eye
orbits suggested nutritional stress in childhood, possibly anemia, and childhood nutritional deficiencies
were also recorded in his teeth (hypoplasias).
The man was buried with a cluster of small copperalloy wire rings between his upper right arm and chest.
Pins that were aligned precisely along his right upper
arm indicated that cloth may have been attached in
that location, possibly enclosing the ringsperhaps
an armband or underarm pouch. The rings may have
been part of a conjuring bundle of some kind, which
would have been concealed on his person in life.
This elderly man may have had powers that were
offered to or sought out by others in the community.
His conjuring apparatus went with him to the grave,
perhaps pointing to a close association of the items
themselves with the practitioner. The location of the
burial, in the northern part of the cemetery, suggests
that he died during or after the Revolution, and it is
possible he was one of the many refugees who came
to the city during the war.
James Denbow offers another interpretation of the Sankofa/heart
shape. His study of heart-shaped designs on tombstones dating to
the early twentieth century in the Loango coast of West Central
Africa found that the heart was perceived as the location of the
soul of the inner body, called mwela [] manifested physically by
the breath (Denbow 1999:412). Thus, Denbow saw the heart shape
as representing the soul of the deceased. Perhaps the symbol was
recognized (although differently) by both West and West-Central
Africans. As Fennell (2003:2324) has noted, symbols become
widespread through cultural contact, and cultures assign nuances of
encoded meaning to them. However, Denbow also cites earlier sources
that considered the soul to be contained in the head and represented
heads as cruciform and helioform (Denbow 1999:413). The heart
as a two-lobed, pointed-base figure does not necessarily represent the
concept as it would have been expressed in the eighteenth-century
Loango region.
7
Iron tacks may have been chosen for this coffin based on the symbolic
importance of iron in some African cultures (Puckett 1926:218;
Thompson 1983:5261) and in African American conjuration (Puckett
1926:208, 230, 237, 252, 277, 478).
6
Ancestors, Cultural Roots, and

the Transformation of African to
African American Identities
New York remembered and honored their ancestral

traditions.
Characteristic of todays African American sensibility is the apparently straightforward query, Who
are your people? This question asks both Where
did you come from? and How do we relate to one
another? The abhorrent circumstances under which
people were separated from their families and homelands complicate the search for origins and cultural
roots of African-descendant people throughout the
African Diaspora. The multidisciplinary New York
African Burial Ground Project has developed new
lines of data, and a host of questions, about the origins of early African New Yorkers, through historical
research, preliminary genetic and craniometric data,
and archaeological analysis.
As noted, the projects history volume (Medford
2009), highlights the scope of the trade in captives and
the range of societies from which the burial ground
population derived. The skeletal biology volume
(Blakey and Rankin-Hill 2009a) has examined the
physical remains of the ancestors for indications of
their places of origin. Their research found a range
of probable birthplaces, from the continent of Africa
to the Caribbean to New York. The archaeology has
been less specific in its investigation of roots. But
what we do observe in a number of instances is that
even if today we cannot read specific places in Africa
from the material record, we can read that people
were declaring to one another that their people were
African.
Although none of the objects associated with distinctive burials precisely answers the question of
origins, the mobilization of material culture is a thread
that appears to run through the temporal groups. It
would not be surprising if materials and associations
that held particular significance in Africa continued
to be important to African people in New York. The
deceased may have been people newly captured from
Africa (possibly in Burials101 and 340), a child born
into captivity in New York (Burial22), or second- or
third-generation African Americans whose forbears
maintained and transmitted African cultural practices
despite, or as a respite from, the brutality of their lives
in North America (the elderly man in Burial147). The
material from these graves clearly points out that at
least some of the African people of eighteenth-century
The archaeological excavation of the New York African Burial Ground has opened a window on how
Africans under slavery cared for their dead in a key
center of colonial Americas urban north. It makes
sense, then, to design research agendas around the
findings the burial grounds archaeological record has
brought to light. Future research might focus more
deeply on how African New Yorkers used the burial
ground for community purposes of their own. Several
lines of investigation show promise of providing a
fuller grasp of the cemetery as a setting for reshaping
social ties within and across generations:
1. The connections among individuals interred in
close proximity, be it within the same grave shaft or
within a burial cluster. Genetic analysis of the remains
might reveal kinship or home-place ties between
the individuals in these graves. Such information, if
coupled with data on nutrition, disease, and physical
trauma, might yield a more fine-grained picture of the
biocultural experiences that marked kin, compatriots,
or friends whose graves were clustered together.8
2. Rural-to-urban migration during the Revolutionary War and its immediate aftermath. During the
1700s, the promise of freedom pulled Africans from
near and far to New York City, but the movement of
blacks into Manhattan accelerated during the British
occupation. A systematic look at documentation relevant to Africans on the move after 1776, along with
a close examination of the bioskeletal signatures of
Late Group burials, might furnish insights into the
social/regional roots of the burial patterns and material
culture in the northern part of the cemetery.
3. The social and material production of a proper
burial in the independent black churches that provided burial facilities after the African Burial Ground
had closed. How was the proper burial of the
seventeenth/eighteenth century reconfigured in the
liturgies and in the burial yards and vaults of the
citys nineteenth-century black churches? Were the
accoutrements, logistics, and divisions of labor that
Future Research
We assume that African people buried at the cemetery formed

familiesquite simply, the birth of children would have begun
families, and however strained the logistics of maintaining ties, family
relationships would have built exponentially.
8

constituted a proper burial altered during periods
of heightened social suffering, such as the yellow
fever or cholera years? Using the New York African Burial Ground as a baseline might offer a more
sophisticated grasp of how a rite of passage is remade
when the organizing structures in the world around
it have changed.
We suggest a new look at one of the key stories
of early African American history in New York, the
founding of the AME Zion and St. Philips Churches.
It should make a difference if one imagines, as we do,
that the African Burial Ground provided an institutional
basis as well as founding personnel for the churches.
The African Methodist and Episcopal churches might
have had a century-and-a-halfs worth of African and
then African American religious philosophy and ritual
practice upon which to build.
More generally, the information obtained from
the New York African Burial Ground archaeological
investigation adds significantly to an ever-growing
database on the historic material culture of the African
Diaspora. It is hoped that the findings reported here
will be useful to a large research community. For
example, changing ritual practices of African descendant people and the symbolic dimensions of their
material culture should continue to be interrogated
through African eyes. Symbols, especially those used
by oppressed populations, are not necessarily accessible to outsiders; the multivalent aspect of symbolic
practices enables divergent meanings to be cloaked.
Historical archaeologists, with input from historians,
anthropologists, and folklorists, continually explore
new ways to recognize and interpret symbols used
by African Americans. Fresh examination of objects
and their associations should continue to be fruit-
ful, and it is hoped that items recovered at the New

York African Burial Ground will become part of this
broader project.
The archaeological data from the New York African
Burial Ground should continue to be analyzed within a
worldwide context. This site did not exist in a historical, geographic, or cultural vacuum. As important as
the African Burial Ground is, the excavated site offers
but a glimpse of African life in a cosmopolitan center
of colonial American. The burial ground adds to a
growing multidimensional perspective on Africans
during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, but it
bears closer comparison to other sites in Africa, North
and South America, and the Caribbean.
The African Burial Ground will not be forgotten
again. This can be attributed to the keen interest of
African descendants in their communitys material
past as much as it can to the insights and data compiled
here. The research offers new avenues for teaching
and learning about the people of the African Diaspora
and for hearing their long-stifled voices. We hope this
report, along with the skeletal biology volume (Volume1 of this series) and the history volume (Volume3
of this series) will inspire and educate both academics
and the public. We also hope to engage students, colleagues, and the public in a broader examination of the
African American past and to create inclusive histories that transform our views of the past, the present,
and the future. Creating inclusive histories involves
breaking down boundaries between the academy
and African Americandescendant communities so
that we all can learn from oral history, apply African
American perspectives on material culture, and create
memorials that honor the long history of the African
Diaspora.
Epilogue
Warren R. Perry
The African Burial Ground has become a symbol of

the strength, spirit, and agency of African descendant
people in New York over nearly four centuries of
exploitation and inequality. The site has attracted tens
of thousands of visitors and is the focus of deeply felt
reverence by many people in the United States and
Africa and throughout the African Diaspora.
The Rites of Ancestral Return culminated in New
York City on Friday, October3, and Saturday, October4, 2003. Four individual coffins, representing the
men, women, boys, and girls among the ancestors,
were conveyed in a procession up Broadway to the
African Burial Ground Memorial Site. The event was
both a funeral and a celebration, and the ceremonies
Mother Delois Blakely heads the procession of the coffins from Wall
Street to the African Burial Ground (photograph by Sherrill D. Wilson).
were exhilarating, as well as profoundly solemn. An

overnight vigil marked the ancestors last hours away
from their rightful resting place.
Dr.Michael Blakey and the Institute for Historical
Biology at the College of William and Mary, which he
now heads, invited New York African Burial Ground
Project staff and researchers to attend a Friday night
reception in the Presidential Suite at the Millennium

Hilton Hotel. Following this event, several members
of the Howard University research teams returned to
the site to pay final respects to the ancestors before
the next days re-interment ceremonies.
It was nearing midnight when we arrived at the
memorial site. It had been a long and emotionally
charged day, but each of us felt drawn to spend a last
few personal moments with the ancestors, remembering them not as the subjects of scientific research but
as living people who had endured lives of pain and
struggle, love and sadness, strength and meaning.
Most of the days attendees had left by this time.
Among those who remained were several members
of the descendant community who had spoken out
and advocated for the ancestors since the early 1990s,
among them Mother Delois Blakely, Queen Mother
Jordan, and the Chief Alagba Egunfemi Adegbolola.
The night had gone chill and the spotlights had gone
out, but the descendants that remained seemed to draw
light and heat and sustenance from the presence of
the once-forgotten ones who were returning to their
rightful place.
We offered our farewell to the ancestors and turned
to leave, passing by the memorial site and the platform
on which many of the descendants still clustered. As
we walked up Elk Street, a young man ran up from
behind. Mother Blakely had sent him to ask for elders
for the naming ceremony. Would we come back to
participate? the young man asked.
Our first impulse was to offer a polite excuse and
continue on. It was cold, we were tired, and the mornings observances were but a few hours away. But the
voices of the ancestors resounded in our heads:
Were we not cold?
Were we not tired?
Did we not wish for home and rest?
376 Warren R. Perry
Wooden coffins, hand carved in Ghana, held the ancestors remains

for reburial at the African Burial Ground (photograph by Anne and Jon
Abbott).
We could not refuse this summons, on the eve

of their reburial, and we returned to the site, where
Dr.Michael Blakey, as the projects scientific director,
was to be named in the African tradition. We spoke in
low voices, which could not have been overheard: I
am cold, and at that moment a blanket was offered;

I am tired, and a chair appeared almost from thin
air. We felt as though the ancestors had acknowledged
our sincerity in returning to the vigil and favored us
with respite from our discomforts.
It has been a tremendous privilege to work for the
New York African Burial Ground Project. Privilege,
in this case, is not to be confused with ease. In many
ways it has been one of the most difficult projects we
will ever conduct. It was also one of the most spiritually rewarding. We have been blessed to be offered
the opportunity to share a fraction of the ancestors
experiences: the hard work, the setbacks, the pain of
loss. We also have been blessed by the strength and
sense of purpose that comes from building a cadre of
committed workers. Much as the ancestors built new
social networks, cultures, and identities for themselves, the people who have worked and fought for
the African Burial Ground have shared deep bonds.
The ancestors inspired us to keep moving forward
through our tribulations and to keep in mind that our
commitment was to honor their courage, strength,
and dignity.
Primary Sources, by Archive
John Street Methodist Church Archives, New York

Accounts, 17831795
Class Rolls, 17851790
Municipal Archives of the City of New York
Papers of the Common Council, Petitions, Free
Negroes and Slaves of the City of New York,
February 14, 1787
Papers of the Common Council, Petitions, Isaac
Fortune, June 19, 1795
Papers of the Common Council, Petitions,
Thomas Shreve, April 19, 1771
New York County, Office of the Register
Deaths
Deeds Liber
New York Genealogical and Biographical Society
Moravian Church Death Records, 17521890
Burial Register of the Reformed Dutch Church
in the City of New York, 17271804
New-York Historical Society
Account Books of Samuel Deall, 17571766,
Invoice Book (Book T)
Joshua Delaplaine Papers, 17211779,
18151817, Day Book of Joshua Delaplaine,
17521756
New York Public Library, Special Collections

Gerard Bancker Plans, 17701848
British Headquarters Papers, 17751783
Book of Negroes
List of Barrack Houses in the Garrison of New
York, undated
Provost Weekly Returns, 17821783
New York State Archives, Albany
New York Colonial Manuscripts, Dutch Patents
and Deeds, 16301664
Letters Patent, 1664present
Trinity Church Archives
Minutes of the Vestry, 16971791
References
African-American Archaeology Newsletter

1997 Slave Ship Artifacts Exhibited. AfricanAmerican Archaeology Newsletter 19:89.
Agorsah, E. Kofi, Michael L. Blakey, and Warren
R. Perry
1999 Archaeology, Bioanthropology and African
Identity in the African Diaspora. Paper presented at the XVIII International Congress
for Caribbean Archaeology, July 1117, St.
George, Grenada.
Albert, Lillian Smith, and Kathryn Kent
1949 The Complete Button Book. Doubleday,
Garden City, New York.
Alpern, Stanley B.
1995 What Africans Got for Their Slaves: A
Master List of European Trade Goods. History in Africa 22:543.
Appiah, Kwame Anthony
1992 In My Fathers House: Africa in the
Philosophy of Culture. Oxford University
Press, New York.
Armstrong, Douglas
1999 Archaeology and Ethnohistory of the
Caribbean Plantation. In I, Too, Am
America: Archaeological Studies of
African-American Life, edited by Theresa
A. Singleton, pp. 173192. University
Press of Virginia, Charlottesville.
Armstrong, Douglas, and Mark Fleischman
1993 Analysis of Four Burials from African
Jamaican Houseyard Contexts at Seville.
Report to the Jamaica National Heritage
Trust. Archaeological Reports, vol. 6.
Syracuse University, Syracuse.
Arthur, Robert Warren

1985 The Deall Account Books, 17561778.
New York Genealogical and Biographical
Record 116:3646, 105110, 146152,
216220.
Baart, Jan
1988 Glass Bead Sites in Amsterdam. Historical
Archaeology 22(1):6775.
Barquist, David L.
2001 Myer Myers: Jewish Silversmith in Colonial New York. Yale University Art Gallery
in association with Yale University Press,
New Haven, Connecticut.
Barratt, Claire
2005 Shroud. In Encyclopedia of Clothing and
Fashion, vol. 3, edited by Valerie Steele,
pp. 180182. Thomas Gale, New York.
Baumgarten, Linda
1992 Under Waistcoats and Drawers. Dress
19:416.
2002 What Clothes Reveal: The Language of
Clothing in Colonial and Federal America.
Yale University Press in association with
the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation,
New Haven, Connecticut.
Ben-Amos, Paula Girshick
1999 Art, Innovation, and Politics in EighteenthCentury Benin. Indiana University Press,
Bloomington.
Blakey, Michael L.
2009 Introduction. In Skeletal Biology of the
New York African Burial Ground, edited by
Michael L. Blakey and Lesley M. RankinHill, Chapter 1. The New York African
380 References
Burial Ground: Unearthing the African
Presence in Colonial New York, vol. 1, pt
1. Howard University, Washington, D.C.
Blakey, M. L., M. E. Mack, K. Shujaa, and R.
Watkins
2009 Laboratory Organization, Methods, and
Processes. In Skeletal Biology of the New
York African Burial Ground, edited by
Presence in Colonial New York, vol. 1, pt.
Blakey, Michael L., and Lesley M. Rankin-Hill
(editors)
2009a Skeletal Biology of the New York African
Burial Ground. 2 pts. The New York African Burial Ground: Unearthing the African
Presence in Colonial New York, vol. 1.
Howard University, Washington, D.C.
2009b Demographic Overview of the African
Burial Ground and Colonial Africans of
New York. In Skeletal Biology of the New
Michael L. Blakey and Lesley M. RankinHill, Appendix C. The New York African
Blakey, M. L., L. M. Rankin-Hill, J. E. Howson,
and S. H. H. Carrington
2009 The Political Economy of Forced Migration: Sex Ratios, Mortality, Population,
Growth, and Fertility among Africans in
Colonial New York. In Skeletal Biology
of the New York African Burial Ground,
edited by Michael L. Blakey and Lesley M.
Rankin-Hill, Chapter 13. The New York
African Burial Ground: Unearthing the
African Presence in Colonial New York,
vol. 1, pt. 1. Howard University, Washington, D.C.
Bolster, W. Jeffrey
1997 Black Jacks: African American Seamen in
the Age of Sail. Harvard University Press,
Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Bolton, Reginald Pelham
1924 Washington Heights, Manhattan: Its Eventful Past. Dyckman Institute, New York.
Brathwaite, Edward Kamau

1981 Folk Culture of the Slaves in Jamaica.
New Beacon Books, London.
Breen, T. H.
2004 The Marketplace of Revolution: How Consumer Politics Shaped American Independence. Oxford University Press, New York.
Brodhead, John Romeyn
18531887 Documents Relative to the Colonial
History of the State of New York: Procured
in Holland, England, and France, edited
by Edmund B. OCallaghan and Berthold
Fernow. 15 vols. Weed, Parson, Albany,
New York.
Brown, Kenneth L.
2001 Interwoven Traditions: Archaeology of the
Conjurers Cabins and the African American Cemetery at the Jordon and Frogmore
Manor Plantations. In Places of Cultural
Memory: African Reflections on the American Landscape, edited by Brian D. Joyner,
pp. 99114. Department of the Interior,
National Park Service, Washington, D.C.
Electronic document, www.cr.nps.gov/
crdi/conferences/AFR_99-114Kbrown.pdf,
accessed 2005.
Brown, Kenneth L., and Doreen C. Cooper
1990 Structural Continuity in an African American Slave and Tenant Community. Historical Archaeology 24(4):719.
Bullock, Steven C.
1996 Revolutionary Brotherhood: Freemasonry
and the Transformation of the American
Social Order, 17301840. University of
North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.
Burrows, Edwin G., and Mike Wallace
1999 Gotham: A History of New York City to
1898. Oxford University Press, New York.
Butler, Jon
1983 The Huguenots in America: A Refugee
People in New World Society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
2000 Becoming America: The Revolution Before
1776. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Calver, William Louis, and Reginald Pelham Bolton
1950 History Written with Pick and Shovel.
New-York Historical Society, New York.
References 381
Cannan, Gwynedd
2004 Unearthing Our Past. Trinity News. Electronic document, http://www.trinitywallstreet.org/resources/article.php?id=320,
accessed December 2004.
Cantwell, Anne-Marie, and Diana diZerega Wall
2001 Unearthing Gotham: The Archaeology of
New York City. Yale University Press, New
Haven, Connecticut.
Chamberlain, Andrew
1999 Teaching Surgery and Breaking the Law.
British Archaeology 48. Electronic document, http://www.britarch.ac.uk/ba/ba48/
ba48toc.html, accessed September 2000.
Cheek, Charles D. (editor)
2003 Archaeological Investigation of the 290
Broadway Federal Office Building Site,
Block 154, New York, New York. Draft.
John Milner Associates. Submitted to
Edwards and Kelcey Engineers, New York
and U.S. General Services Administration,
Region 2, New York.
Christoph, Peter R.
1984 The Freedmen of New Amsterdam. Journal of the Afro-American Historical and
Genealogical Society 4:139154.
Coffin, Margaret M.
1976 Death in Early America: The History and
Folklore of Customs and Superstitions of
Early Medicine, Funerals, Burials and
Mourning. Thomas Nelson, Nashville, Tennessee.
Cooper, James Fenimore
1912 [1845] Satanstoe, or the Littlepage Manuscripts: A Tale of the Colony. Reprinted.
Mohawk ed. G. P. Putnams Sons, New
York. Originally published by Richard
Bentley, London.
Cotter, John L. (compiler)
1968 Handbook for Historical Archaeology, pt.
1. John L. Cotter, Philadelphia.
Crosby, Ernest H.
1886 The Rutgers Family of New York. New
York Genealogical and Biographical
Record 17(1):8293.
Cunnington, C. Willet, and Phillis Cunnington
1981 The History of Underclothes. Rev. ed.
Faber and Faber, London.
Cunnington, C. Willet, Phillis Cunnington, and

Charles Beard
1960 A Dictionary of English Costume, 900
1900. Adam and Charles Black, London.
Curtin, Phillip D.
1964 The Image of Africa: British Ideas and
Actions, 17801850, vol. 1. University of
Wisconsin Press, Madison.
Danckaerts, Jasper
1913 Journal of Jasper Danckaerts, 16791680,
edited by Bartlett Burleigh James and J.
Franklin Jameson. Charles Scribners Sons,
New York.
David, Nicholas
1992 Archaeology of Ideology: Mortuary
Practices in the Central Mandara Highlands, Northern Cameroon. In An African
Commitment: Papers in Honour of Peter
Lewis Shinnie, edited by Judy Sterner and
Nicholas David, pp. 181210. University
of Calgary Press, Calgary.
Davis, Thomas J.
1985 A Rumor of Revolt: The Great Negro
Plot in Colonial New York. Free Press,
New York.
Deagan, Kathleen A.
1987 Artifacts of the Spanish Colonies of
Florida and the Caribbean, 15001800.
Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington,
D.C.
DeCorse, Christopher R.
1989 Beads as Chronological Indicators in
African Archaeology: A Re-examination.
Beads: Journal of the Society of Bead
Researchers 1:4153.
1992 Culture, Contact, Continuity and Change
on the Gold Coast, a.d. 14001900. African Archaeological Review 10:163196.
1999 Oceans Apart: Perspectives on New World
Archaeology. In I, Too, Am America:
Archaeological Studies of African-American Life, edited by Theresa A. Singleton,
pp. 132158. University Press of Virginia,
Charlottesville.
2001 An Archaeology of Elmina: Africans and
Europeans on the Gold Coast, 14001900.
Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington,
D.C.
382 References
Deetz, James
1996 In Small Things Forgotten: An Archaeology of Early American Life. Anchor Books,
New York.
Delpuech, Andr
2001 Historical Archaeology in the French West
Indies: Recent Research in Guadeloupe. In
Island Lives: Historical Archaeologies of
the Caribbean, edited by Paul Farnsworth,
pp. 2159. University of Alabama Press,
Tuscaloosa.
Denbow, James R.
1999 Heart and Soul: Glimpses of Ideology and
Cosmology in the Iconography of Tombstones from the Loango Coast of Central
Africa. Journal of American Folklore
112:404423.
Desrochers, Robert E., Jr.
2002 Slave-For-Sale Advertisements and Slavery in Massachusetts, 17041781. William
and Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 59(3):623
664.
De Voe, Thomas F.
1969 [1862] The Market Book. Printed for the
author. 1969 ed. Burt Franklin, New York.
Drewal, Henry John, and John Mason
1998 Beads, Body, and Soul: Art and Light in
the Yorb Universe. Fowler Museum of
Cultural History, University of California,
Los Angeles, Los Angeles.
Dubin, Lois Sherr
1987 The History of Beads: From 30,000 b.c. to
the Present. Harry N. Abrams, New York.
Duffy, John
1968 A History of Public Health in New York
City, 16251966. 2 vols. Russell Sage
Foundation, New York.
Earle, Alice Morse
1894 Costume of Colonial Times. Charles Scribners Sons, New York.
1896 Colonial Days in Old New York. Charles
Scribners Sons, New York.
Eltis, David
2000 The Rise of African Slavery in the Americas. Cambridge University Press, New
York.
Epperson, Terrence W.
1999 The Contested Commons: Archaeologies of Race, Repression, and Resistance
in New York City. In Historical Archaeologies of Capitalism, edited by Mark

P. Leone and Parker B. Potter, Jr., pp.
81110. Plenum Press, New York.
Ertrell, Viviane Beck
1973 The Colorful World of Buttons. Pyne Press,
Princeton, New Jersey.
Fales, Martha Gandy
1995 Jewelry in America, 16001900. Antique
Collectors Club, Woodbridge, Suffolk,
England.
Feeley-Harnik, Gillian
1991 A Green Estate: Restoring Independence
in Madagascar. Smithsonian Institution
Press, Washington, D.C.
Fennell, Christopher C.
2003 Group Identity, Individual Creativity,
and Symbolic Generation in a BaKongo
Diaspora. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 7(1):131.
Ferguson, Leland
1992 Uncommon Ground: Archaeology and
Early African America, 16501800. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
1999 The Cross is a Magic Sign: Marks on
Eighteenth-Century Bowls from South
Carolina. In I, Too, Am America:
Charlottesville.
Foote, Thelma
1991 Black Life in Colonial Manhattan, 1664
1786. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor,
Michigan.
2004 Black and White Manhattan: The History
of Racial Formation in Colonial New York.
Oxford University Press, New York.
Foster, Helen Bradley
1997 New Raiments of Self: African American
Clothing in the Antebellum South. Berg,
Oxford, England.
Francis, Peter, Jr.
1993 West African Powder Glass Beads. Ornament 16(4):9697, 100101.
Frazer, James G.
1886 On Certain Burial Customs as Illustrative of the Primitive Theory of the Soul.
References 383
Journal of the Anthropological Institute of
Great Britain and Ireland 15:63104.
Fredrickson, N. Jaye
1980 The Covenant Chain: Indian Ceremonial
and Trade Silver. National Museums of
Canada, Ottawa.
French Church du Saint Esprit
1968 Registers of the Births, Marriages, and
Deaths of the glise Franoise la Nouvelle York from 1688 to 1804, edited by
Alfred V. Wittmeyer. Genealogical Publishing, Baltimore, Maryland.
Gilbert, Michelle
1993 The Leopard Who Sleeps in a Basket:
Akuapem Secrecy in Everyday Life and in
Royal Metaphor. In Secrecy: African Art
that Conceals and Reveals, edited by Mary
H. Nooter, pp. 123139. Prestal-Verlag,
Munich, Germany.
Gillingham, Harrold E.
1936 Indian Ornaments Made by Philadelphia
Silversmiths. Museum of the American
Indian, Heye Foundation, New York.
Gittings, Clare
1984 Death, Burial and the Individual in Early
Modern England. Croom Helm, London.
Gomez, Michael
1998 Exchanging Our Country Marks: The
Transformation of African Identities in the
Colonial and Antebellum South. University
of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.
Goodfriend, Joyce
1978 Burghers and Blacks: The Evolution of a
Slave Society at New Amsterdam. New
York History 59:125144.
1984 Black Families in New Netherland. Journal of the Afro-American Historical and
Genealogical Society 5:95107.
1992 Before the Melting Pot: Society and
Culture in Colonial New York City, 1664
1730. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
2003 The Souls of African American Children:
New Amsterdam. Common-Place 3(4).
Electronic document, http://www.common-place.org/vol-03/no-04/new-york/,
accessed December 2005.
Goodman, A., J. Jones, J. Reid, M. E. Mack, M. L.

Blakey, D. Amarasiriwardena, P. Bruton, and D.
Coleman
2009 Isotopic and Elemental Chemistry of Teeth:
Implications for Places of Birth, Forced
Migration Patterns, Nutritional Status, and
Pollution. In Skeletal Biology of the New
Gottesman, Rita S.
1938 The Arts and Crafts in New York, 1726
1776: Advertisements and News Items
from New York City Newspapers. The John
Watts De Peyster Publication Fund Series,
vol. 69. Collections of the New-York
Historical Society. New-York Historical
Society, New York.
Green, Evarts B., and Virginia D. Harrington
1932 American Population before the Federal
Census of 1790. Columbia University
Press, New York.
Greenberg, Douglas
1974 Crime and Law Enforcement in the Colony
of New York, 16911776. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York.
Greene, Lorenzo
1944 The New England Negro as Seen in Advertisements for Runaway Slaves. Journal of
Negro History 29:125146.
Gregory, C. A.
1996 Cowries and Conquest: Towards a Subalternate Quality Theory of Money. Comparative Studies in Society and History
38(2):195217.
Gronbeck, Christopher
1997 Sunangle. Electronic document, http://susdesign.com/sunangle, accessed 2000.
Gundaker, Grey
2001 Signs of Diaspora, Diaspora of Signs: Literacies, Creolization and Vernacular Practice in African America. Oxford University
Press, New York.
Habenstein, Robert W., and William M. Lamers
1963 Funeral Customs the World Over. Bulfin
Printers, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
384 References
1981 The History of American Funeral Directing. 2nd rev. ed. Bulfin Printers, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Hall, Edward Hagaman
1910 An Historical Sketch of City Hall Park.
Annual Report. American Scenic and Historic Preservation Society 15:385424.
Hamilton, John D.
1994 Material Culture of the American Freemasons. University Press of New England,
Hanover, Massachusetts.
Handler, Jerome S.
1994 Determining African Birth from Skeletal
Remains: A Note on Tooth Mutilation.
Historical Anthropology 28:113119.
1997 An African-Type Healer/Diviner and His
Grave Goods: A Burial from a Plantation
Slave Cemetery in Barbados, West Indies.
International Journal of Historical Archaeology 1(2):91130.
1998 Problematical Glass Artifacts from Newton Plantation Slave Cemetery, Barbados.
20:14.
Handler, Jerome S., and Frederick W. Lange
1978 Plantation Slavery in Barbados: An
Archaeological and Historical Investigation. Harvard University Press, Cambridge,
Massachusetts.
Handloff, Robert E.
1982 Prayers, Amulets and Charms: Health and
Social Control. African Studies Review
25(23):185194.
Harris, Gale, Jean Howson, and Betsy Bradley
1993 African Burial Ground and the Commons
Historic District Designation Report. New
York City Landmarks Preservation Commission.
Heath, Barbara J.
1999 Buttons, Beads, and Buckles: Contextualizing Adornment within the Bounds
of Slavery. In Historical Archaeology,
Identity Formation, and the Interpretation of Ethnicity, edited by Maria Franklin
and Garrett Fesler, pp. 4768. Colonial
Williamsburg Foundation, Williamsburg,
Virginia.
Heaton, Claude Edwin

1943 Body Snatching in New York City. New
York Journal of Medicine 43:18611864.
Herbert, Eugenia W.
1984 Red Gold: Copper Arts of Africa. Mount
Holyoke College Art Museum, South Hadley, Massachusetts.
Hershkowitz, Leo
2003 Anatomy of a Slave Voyage, New York
1721. De Halve Maen 76(3):4551.
Heywood, Linda, and John Thornton
2009a West Central Africa and the Origins of
New Amsterdams Black Population. In
Historical Perspectives of the African
Burial Ground: New York Blacks and the
Diaspora, edited by Edna Greene Medford,
pp. 912. The New York African Burial
Ground: Unearthing the African Presence
in Colonial New York, vol. 3. Howard
University, Washington, D.C.
2009b The Political History of West Africa
in the Eighteenth Century. In Historical
Perspectives of the African Burial Ground:
New York Blacks and the Diaspora, edited
by Edna Greene Medford, pp. 2934.
The New York African Burial Ground:
Unearthing the African Presence in Colonial New York, vol. 3. Howard University,
Washington, D.C.
Higginbotham, A. Leon, Jr.
1978 In the Matter of Color: Race and the Legal
Process: The Colonial Period. Oxford
University Press, New York.
Hildeburn, Charles R.
1895 Sketches of Printers and Printing in Colonial New York. Dodd, Mead, New York.
Hinks, Stephen
1988 A Structural and Functional Analysis of
Eighteenth Century Buttons. Unpublished
Masters thesis, Department of Anthropology, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia.
Hodges, Graham Russell
1999 Root and Branch: African Americans in
New York and East Jersey, 16131863.
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel
Hill.
References 385
Hodges, Graham Russell, and Alan Edward Brown
(editors)
1994 Pretends to be Free: Runaway Slave
Advertisements from Colonial and Revolutionary New York and New Jersey. Garland, New York.
Hogendorn, Jan, and Marion Johnson
1986 The Shell Money of the Slave Trade.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
England.
Homberger, Eric
1994 The Historical Atlas of New York City: A
Visual Celebration of Nearly 400 Years of
New York Citys History. Henry Holt, New
York.
Horsmanden, Daniel
1971 The New York Conspiracy, edited with an
introduction by Thomas J. Davis. Beacon
Press, Boston.
Houart, Victor
1977 Buttons: A Collectors Guide. Charles
Scribners Sons, New York.
Howard University and John Milner Associates
1993 Research Design for Archaeological,
Historical, and Bioanthropological Investigations of the African Burial Ground
(Broadway Block) New York, New York.
Howard University and John Milner
Associates. Submitted to the U.S. General
Services Administration, Region 2, New
York.
Howson, Jean, and Gale Harris
1992 African Burial Ground National Historic
Landmark Nomination. U.S. Department
of the Interior, National Park Service.
Hudgins, Carter
1977 Historical Archaeology and Salvage
Archaeological Excavations at College
Landing. Interim Report. Virginia Research
Center of Archaeology, Richmond.
Humphrey, David C.
1973 Dissection and Discrimination: The Social
Origins of Cadavers in America, 1760
1915. Bulletin of the New York Academy of
Medicine, 2nd ser., 49(9):819827.
Hunt, Patricia K.
1994 Textile Fragments Recovered from a Slave
Cemetery in South Carolina. Ars Textrina
22:87105.
Hunter Research
1994 African Burial Ground and the Commons
Historic District Archaeological Sensitivity
Study. Hunter Research. Submitted to New
York City Department of General Services,
Region 2.
Hyatt, Harry Middleton
1935 Folk-Lore from Adams County, Illinois.
Alma Egan Hyatt Foundation, New York.
Ingle, Marjorie, Jean Howson, and Edward S.
Rutsch
1990 A Stage IA Cultural Resource Survey of
the Proposed Foley Square Project in the
Borough of Manhattan, New York, New
York. Historical Conservation and Interpretation. Submitted to Edwards and Kelcey
Engineers, New York.
Insoll, Timothy, and Thurstan Shaw
1997 Gao and Igbo-Ukwu: Beads, Interregional
Trade, and Beyond. African Archaeological Review 14(1):923.
Jackson, Michael
1989 Paths Toward a Clearing: Radical Empiricism and Ethnographic Inquiry. Indiana
University Press, Bloomington.
Jamieson, Ross
1995 Material Culture and Social Death: African-American Burial Practices. Historical
Janowitz, Meta
2005 Sara Roeloffse in Fact and Fiction. Paper
presented at the Society of Historical
Archaeology Conference on Historical and
Underwater Archaeology, January 510,
York, England.
Janowitz, Meta, and Charles D. Cheek
2003 The New York Ceramic Industry and its
Use of the Burial Ground. In Archaeological Investigation of the 290 Broadway Federal Office Building Site, Block 154, New
York, New York, edited by Charles Cheek,
Chapter 6. John Milner Associates. Submitted to Edwards and Kelcey Engineers,
New York, and the U.S. General Services
Administration, Region 2, New York.
Johnson, William (compiler)
18531859 Reports of Cases Argued and
Determined in the Supreme Court of
Judicature, and in the Court for the Trial
386 References
of Impeachments and the Correction of
Errors in the State of New-York. 20 vols.
Banks and Brothers, Albany, New York.
Jones, Adam
1983 German Sources for West African History.
Franz Steiner Verlag GMBH, Weisbaden,
Germany.
Jones, Lynn
2001 Archeological Monitoring and Excavations
in St. Annes Churchyard 18AP43 Annapolis, Maryland. John Milner Associates.
Submitted to St. Annes Church, Annapolis, Maryland.
Jordan, Louis
1998 Coin and Currency Collections in the
Department of Special Collections, University of Notre Dame Libraries. Electronic
document, www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/
ColCoinText/Br-Copper.2.html, accessed
2005.
Karklins, Karlis
1974 Seventeenth Century Dutch Beads. Historical Archaeology 8:6482.
1985 Glass Beads. 2nd ed. National Historic
Parks and Sites Branch, Parks Canada,
Environment Canada, Ottawa.
1992 Trade Ornament Usage among the Native
Peoples of Canada: A Source Book.
National Historic Sites, Parks Service,
Environment Canada, Ottawa.
1993 The A Speo Method of Heat Rounding
Drawn Glass Beads and its Archaeological Manifestations. Beads: Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 5:2736.
Kelso, William M.
1984 Kingsmill Plantations, 16191800:
Archaeology of Country Life in Colonial
Virginia. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.
Ketchum, William C., Jr.
1987 Potters and Potteries of New York State,
16501900. 2nd ed. Syracuse University
Press, Syracuse, New York.
Kidd, Kenneth E., and Martha A. Kidd
1983 A Classification System for Glass Beads for
the Use of Field Archaeologists. Proceedings of the 1982 Glass Trade Bead Conference, Rochester Museum and Science
Center Research Records 16:219257.
Kidwell, Claudia R.
1978 Short Gowns. Dress 4:3065.
Kidwell, Claudia R., and Margaret C. Christman
1974 Suiting Everyone: The Democratization of
Clothing in America. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Klepp, Susan E.
1994 Seasoning and Society: Racial Differences
in Mortality in Eighteenth-Century Philadelphia. William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd
ser., 51(3):473506.
Kruger, Vivienne L.
1985 Born to Run: The Slave Family in Early
New York, 1626 to 1827. Ph.D. dissertation, History Department, Columbia University, New York. University Microfilms,
Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Kuyk, Betty M.
1983 The African Derivation of Black Fraternal
Orders in the United States. Comparative
Studies in Society and History 25:559592.
Ladenheim, Jules Calvin
1950 The Doctors Mob of 1788. Journal of
the History of Medicine 5:2343.
Lamb, Alistair
1976 Krobo Powder-Glass Beads. African Arts
9(3):3239.
1978 Some 17th Century Glass Beads from
Ghana, West Africa. The Bead Journal
3(34):2327.
LaRoche, Cheryl J.
1994a Glass Beads Excavated from the African
Burial Ground, New York City: Conservation, Analysis and Interpretation. Unpublished Masters thesis, Program in Museum
Studies, State University of New York,
Fashion Institute of Technology, New
York.
1994b Beads from the African Burial Ground,
New York City: A Preliminary Assessment.
Beads: Journal of the Society of Bead
Researchers 6:320.
2002 Conservation of Materials from the African Burial Ground and the Non-Mortuary
Contexts of the 290 Broadway Block
(Block 154), Foley Square, Lower Manhattan, New York. Draft. John Milner Associates. Submitted to Edwards and Kelcey
Engineers, New York, and U.S. General
References 387
Services Administration, Region 2, New
York.
Launitz-Schrer, Leopold S., Jr.
1980 Slave Resistance in Colonial New York:
An Interpretation of Daniel Horsmandens
New York Conspiracy. Phylon 41:137152.
LeeDecker, Charles
2001 The Coffin Makers Craft: Treatment of the
Dead in Rural Eighteenth Century Delaware. Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology 17:114.
Lenik, Edward J.
1977 A Study of Cast Iron Nails. Historical
Archaeology 11:4547.
Leone, Mark, and Gladys-Marie Fry
1999 Conjuring in the Big House Kitchen: An
Interpretation of African-American Belief
Systems Based on the Uses of Archaeology
and Folklore Sources. Journal of American
Folklore 112:372403.
Lepore, Jill
2005 New York Burning: Liberty, Slavery, and
Conspiracy in Eighteenth-Century Manhattan. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
Linebaugh, Peter, and Marcus Rediker
2000 The Many-Headed Hydra: Sailors, Slaves,
Commoners, and the Hidden History of
the Revolutionary Atlantic. Beacon Press,
Boston.
Litten, Julien
1991 The English Way of Death: The Common
Funeral since 1450. Hale, London.
1997 The Funeral Trade in Hanoverian England 17141760. In The Changing Face
of Death: Historical Accounts of Death
and Disposal, edited by Peter C. Jupp and
Glennys Howarth, pp. 4861. Macmillan
Press, London.
Liu, Peter K., Peter M. Ahn, and Dudley Giberson
2001 Bodom and Related Beads: Investigating
African Powder-Glass Technology. Ornament 25:2833.
Luscomb, Sally
1967 The Collectors Encyclopedia of Buttons.
Bonanza Books, New York.
1974 An Introduction to Armed Forces Buttons:
Anchors. Just Buttons 33(2):3239.
Lydon, James G.
1978 New York and the Slave Trade, 1700 to
1774. William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd
ser., 35(2):375394.
Macy, Harry, Jr.
1994 Lutheran Records of New York City. New
York Genealogical and Biographical Society Newsletter (Winter):2728.
1995 Episcopal Church Records of New York
City. New York Genealogical and Biographical Society Newsletter (Spring):47.
1996 Records of other Protestant Denominations
of New York City. New York Genealogical and Biographical Society Newsletter
(Spring):34.
Matson, Cathy
1998 Merchants and Empire: Trading in Colonial New York. Johns Hopkins University
Press, Baltimore, Maryland.
McCaskie, T. C.
2000 The Consuming Passion of Kwame
Boakye: An Essay on Agency and Identity
in Asanti History. Journal of African Cultural Studies 13(1):4362.
MacDonald, Jean
2001 West African Wisdom: Adinkra Symbols and Meanings. Well-Tempered Web
Design. Electronic document, http://www.
welltempered.net/htmls/adinkra/sank.htm,
accessed 2005.
McKee, Samuel, Jr.
1935 Labor in Colonial New York. Ira J. Friedman, Port Washington, New York.
Medford, Edna Greene (editor)
2009 Historical Perspectives of the African
Diaspora. The New York African Burial
Medford, Edna Greene, and Emilyn L. Brown
2009a New York Africans in the Age of Revolution. In Historical Perspectives of the
African Burial Ground: New York Blacks
and the Diaspora, edited by Edna Greene
Medford, pp. 97102. The New York African Burial Ground: Unearthing the African
Presence in Colonial New York, vol. 3.
Howard University, Washington, D.C.
388 References
2009b Epilogue. In Historical Perspectives
of the African Burial Ground: New York
Blacks and the Diaspora, edited by Edna
Greene Medford, pp. 103105. The New
York African Burial Ground: Unearthing the African Presence in Colonial New
York, vol. 3. Howard University, Washington, D.C.
Medford, Edna Greene, Emilyn L. Brown, Selwyn H. H. Carrington, Linda Heywood, and John
Thornton
2009a Social Characteristics and Cultural Practices of Africans in Eighteenth-Century
New York. In Historical Perspectives
2009b By the Visitations of God: Death,
Burial, and the Affirmation of Humanity.
In Historical Perspectives of the African
2009c The Ubiquity of Work. In Historical
Washington, D.C.
2009d Eighteenth-Century Procurement of African Laborers for New York. In Historical
Washington, D.C.
Medford, Edna Greene, Emilyn L. Brown, Linda
Heywood, and John Thornton
2009a The Quest for Labor: From Privateering to Legitimate Trade. In Historical

New York Blacks and the Diaspora,
edited by Edna Greene Medford, pp. 57.
Washington, D.C.
2009b Slavery and Freedom in New Amsterdam.
In Historical Perspectives of the African
Medford, Edna Greene, Selwyn H. H. Carrington,
Linda Heywood, and John Thornton
2009 West Africa and the Eighteenth-Century
Atlantic Trade. In Historical Perspectives
Montgomery, Florence M.
1984 Textiles in America, 16501870. Norton,
New York.
Moore, Christopher
2005 A World of Possibilities: Slavery and Freedom in Dutch New Amsterdam. In Slavery
in New York, edited by Ira Berlin and Leslie M. Harris, pp. 2956. New Press, New
York.
Morgan, Philip D.
1998 Slave Counterpoint: Black Culture in
the Eighteenth-Century Chesapeake and
Lowcountry. University of North Carolina
Press, Chapel Hill.
Mudimbe, V. Y.
1988 The Invention of Africa: Gnosis, Philosophy, and the Order of Knowledge. Indiana
University Press, Bloomington.
Narrett, David
1992 Inheritance and Family Life in Colonial
New York City. Cornell University Press,
Ithaca, New York.
References 389
Nash, Gary B.
1988 Forging Freedom: The Formation of Philadelphias Black Community, 17201840.
Harvard University Press, Cambridge,
Massachusetts.
Newman, Harold
1981 An Illustrated Dictionary of Jewelry.
Thames and Hudson, New York.
New Netherland Council
1974 Council Minutes, 16381649, translated
by Arthur Van Laer and edited by Kenneth Scott and Kenn Stryker-Rodda. New
York Historical Manuscripts Series, vol. 4.
Genealogical Publishing, Baltimore, Maryland.
New York City Common Council
1905 Minutes of the Common Council of the City
of New York, 16751776, edited by Herbert
L. Osgood, Austin Baxter Keep, Charles
Alexander Nelson, and the New-York Historical Society. 8 vols. Dodd, Mead, New
York.
1917 Minutes of the Common Council of the
City of New York, 17841831, edited by A.
Everett Peterson. 19 vols. M. B. Brown,
New York.
New York County Surrogates Court
1893 Abstracts of Wills on File in the Surrogates Office, City of New York, vol. 1,
edited by William Pelletreau. The John
Watts De Peyster Publication Fund Series,
vol. 25. Collections of the New-York Historical Society. Printed for the [New-York
Historical] Society, New York.
New York Orphanmasters
1902 The Minutes of the Orphanmasters of
New Amsterdam, 1655 to 1663, edited by
Berthold Fernow. 2 vols. Francis P. Harper,
New York.
New York State
1894 Colonial Laws of New York from 1664
to the Revolution, edited by Charles Z.
Lincoln, William H. Johnson, and A. Judd
Northrup. 5 vols. J. B. Lyons, Albany, New
York.
New York Times
1878 Stewarts Stolen Body. 14 November:1.
New York.
Nol Hume, Ivor

1961 Sleeve buttons: diminutive relics of the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.
Antiques 79(4):380383.
1969 A Guide to the Artifacts of Colonial
America. Knopf, New York.
1982 Martins Hundred. Knopf, New York.
Ofori-Ansa, Kwaku
1995 Identification and Validation of the
Sankofa Symbol. Update: Newsletter of
the African Burial Ground and Five Points
Archaeological Projects 1(8):3.
Ogundiran, Akinwumi
2002 Of Small Things Remembered: Beads,
Cowries, and the Cultural Translations of
the Atlantic Experience in Yorubaland.
International Journal of African Historical
Studies 35(23):427457.
Olsen, Stanley J.
1963 Dating Early Plain Buttons by Their Form.
American Antiquity 28:551554.
Parrington, Michael, Daniel G. Roberts, Stephanie
A. Pinter, and Janet C. Wideman
1989 Historical and Archaeological Documentation. The First African Baptist Church
Cemetery: Bioarchaeology, Demography,
and Acculturation of Early Nineteenth
Century Philadelphia Blacks, vol. 1. John
Milner Associates. Submitted to the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Patton, M. Drake
1992 Mankala and Minkisi: Possible Evidence
of African-American Folk Beliefs and
Practices. African-American Archaeology
Newsletter 6:57.
Paynter, Robert, Kerry Lynch, William Burns, Brad
Comeau, Tess Ostrowski, Ruth Morales, Mathew
Garber, Elizabeth Norris, Quentin Lewis, and Sarah
Dion-Roche
2005 The Burghardts of Great Barrington: The
View from the W. E. B. DuBois Boyhood
Homesite. Paper presented at the Society
for Historical Archaeology Conference on
Historical and Underwater Archaeology,
January 510, York, England.
390 References
Peek, Phillip M. (editor)
1991 African Divination Systems: Ways of
Knowing. Indiana University Press,
Bloomington.
Posnansky, Merrick
1999 West Africanist Reflections on AfricanAmerican Archaeology. In I, Too, Am
American: Archaeological Studies of
African-American Life, edited by Theresa
A. Singleton, pp. 2138. University Press
of Virginia, Charlottesville.
Puckett, Newbell Niles
1926 Folk Beliefs of the Southern Negro. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel
Hill.
Quarles, Benjamin
1961 The Negro in the American Revolution.
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel
Hill.
Quimby, George Irving
1966 Indian Culture and European Trade
Goods: The Archaeology of the Historic
Period in the Western Great Lakes Region.
University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.
Rankin-Hill, L. M., M. L. Blakey, J. E. Howson, E.
Brown, S. H. H. Carrington, and K. Shujaa
2009 Demographic Overview of the African
Burial Ground and Colonial Africans of
New York. In Skeletal Biology of the New
Rauschenberg, Bradford L.
1990 Coffin Making and Undertaking in
Charleston and its Environs, 17051820.
Journal of Early Southern Decorative Arts
16(1):1863.
Richardson, Ruth
2000 Death, Dissection, and the Destitute. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Ritchie, William A.
1965 The Archaeology of New York State. Natural History Press, Garden City, New York.
Roberts, Elizabeth
1989 The Lancashire Way of Death. In Death,
Ritual, and Bereavement, edited by Ralph
Houlbrooke, pp. 188207. Routledge, London.

Rodriguez, William C., III
1997 Decomposition of Buried and Submerged
Bodies. In Forensic Taphonomy: The Postmortem Fate of Human Remains, edited by
William D. Haglund and Marcella H. Sorg,
pp. 459467. CRC Press, Boca Raton,
Florida.
Roediger, David R.
1981 And Die in Dixie: Funerals, Death, and
Heaven in the Slave Community, 1700
1865. The Massachusetts Review 22:163
183.
Rose, Jerome C. (editor)
1985 Gone to a Better Land: A Biohistory of a
Rural Black Cemetery in the Post-Reconstruction South. Arkansas Archeological
Survey, Fayetteville.
Rothschild, Nan A.
1990 New York City Neighborhoods: The
Eighteenth Century. Academic Press, New
York.
Royall House Association
1994 Slave Life at the Royall House. Electronic
document, http://www.Royallhouse.org/
slavelife.php, accessed December 2005.
Rundblad, Georganne
1995 Exhuming Womens Premarket Duties in
the Care of the Dead. Gender and Society
9:173192.
Ruppel, Timothy, Jessica Neuwirth, Mark P. Leone,
and Gladys-Marie Fry
2003 Hidden in View: African Spiritual Spaces
in North American Landscapes. Antiquity
77:321335.
Russell, Aaron E.
1997 Material Culture and African-American
Spirituality at the Hermitage. Historical
Sabine, W. H. W. (editor)
1954 The New-York Diary of Lieutenant Jabez
Fitch of the 17th (Connecticut) Regiment
from August 22, 1776 to December 15,
1777. Colburn and Tegg, New York.
Salaman, R. A.
1997 Dictionary of Woodworking Tools, c.
17001970. Rev. ed. Astragal Press, Mendham, New Jersey.
References 391
Samford, Patricia
1994 Searching for West African Cultural Meanings in the Archaeological Record. AfricanAmerican Archaeology Newsletter 12.
1996 The Archaeology of African-American
Slavery and Material Culture. William and
Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 53(1):87114.
Schuyler, Robert L.
1972 Sandy Ground: Archaeological Sampling
in a Black Community in Metropolitan
New York. Conference on Historic Site
Archaeology 2:1351.
Scott, Kenneth
1961 The Slave Insurrection in New York in
1712. New-York Historical Society Quarterly 45:4374.
Shammas, Carole
1982 How Self Sufficient Was Early America?
Journal of Interdisciplinary History
13(2):247272.
Sharpe, John
1881 Proposals for Erecting a School, Library
and Chapel at New York. Publication Fund
Series, vol. 13, pt. 5. Collections of the
New-York Historical Society. New-York
Historical Society, New York.
Sieber, Roy, and Frank Herreman (editors)
2000 Hair in African Art and Culture. Museum
for African Art, New York.
Singleton, Esther
1909 Dutch New York. Dodd, Mead, New York.
Singleton, Theresa A.
1999 An Introduction to African-American
Archaeology. In I, Too, Am America:
Charlottesville.
Sledzik, Paul S., and Mark S. Micozzi
1997 Autopsied, Embalmed, and Preserved
Human Remains: Distinguishing Features in Forensic and Historic Contexts.
In Forensic Taphonomy: The Postmortem
Fate of Human Remains, edited by William D. Haglund and Marcella H. Sorg, pp.
483495. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.
Smith, B. G., and R. Wojtowicz
1989 Blacks Who Stole Themselves: Advertisements for Runaways in the Pennsylvania
Gazette, 17281790. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

Smith, Hale G.
1965 Archaeological Investigations at Santa Rosa
Pensacola. Notes in Anthropology No. 10.
Florida State University, Tallahassee.
South, Stanley
1964 Analysis of the Buttons from Brunswick
Town and Fort Fisher. The Florida Anthropologist 7(2):113133.
Stallybrass, Peter
1998 Marxs Coat. In Border Fetishisms: Material Objects in Unstable Spaces, edited by
Patricia Spyer, pp. 183207. Routledge,
New York.
Stine, Linda Francis, Melanie A. Cabek, and Mark
D. Groover
1996 Blue Beads as African-American Cultural Symbols. Historical Archaeology
30(3):4975.
Stokes, I. N. Phelps
19151928 Iconography of Manhattan Island,
14981909. 6 vols. Robert H. Dodd, New
York.
Stone, Lyle M.
1974 Fort Michilimackinac, 17151781: An
Archaeological Perspective on the Revolutionary Frontier. Publications of the
Museum, Michigan State University, East
Lansing.
St. Philips Church
1986 Reaching Out: An Epic of the People of
St. Philips Church, Its First 170 Years. St.
Philips Church, New York.
Stryker-Rodda, Kenn
1974 Lutheran Church of New York City: Burials. New York Genealogical and Biographical Record 105:3740, 8189, 163166.
Stuckey, Sterling
1994 Going Through the Storm: The Influence of
African American Art in History. Oxford
University Press, New York.
Swan, Robert J.
1995 The Black Population of New Netherland:
As Extracted from the Records of Baptisms
and Marriages of the Dutch Reformed
Church (New York City), 16301664.
Journal of the Afro-American Historical
and Genealogical Society 14(12):8298.
392 References
1998 Slaves and Slaveholding in Dutch New
York, 16281664. Journal of the AfroAmerican Historical and Genealogical
Society 17(1):4881.
Sypher, Francis (editor)
2004 Minutes of Coroners Proceedings, City and
County of New York, John Burnet, Coroner,
17481758. Collections of the New York
Genealogical and Biographical Society,
vol. 16. New York Genealogical and Biographical Society, New York.
Szasz, Farenc M.
1967 The New York Slave Revolt of 1741: A Reexamination. New York History 48:215230.
Talman, Wilfred
1968a Death Customs Among the Colonial
Dutch. De Halve Maen 43(1):1314.
1968b Death Customs Among the Colonial
Dutch. De Halve Maen 42(4):910.
Thompson, Robert Farris
1983 Flash of the Spirit: African and Afro-American Art and Philosophy. Vintage Books,
New York.
Thompson, Robert Farris, and Joseph Cornet
1981 The Four Moments of the Sun: Kongo Art
in Two Worlds. National Gallery of Art,
Washington, D.C.
Tortora, Phyllis G., and Keith Eubank
1998 Survey of Historic Costume: A History of
Western Dress. 3rd ed. Fairchild Publications, New York.
Totten, John Reynolds
1925 Anneke Jans (16071608?1663) and Her
Two Husbands, Roelof Jans (or Jansen)
and Rev. (Domine) Everardus Bogardus
and their Descendants to the Third Generation Inclusive. New York Genealogical and
Biographical Record 61(3):201226.
Trinity Church
n.d. A Directory of Trinity Churchyard, Trinity Parish in the City of New York. Trinity
Church, New York.
Troiani, Don
2001 Military Buttons of the American Revolution. Thomas Publications, Gettysburg,
Pennsylvania.
Ubelaker, Douglas H.
1974 Reconstruction of Demographic Profiles
from Ossuary Skeletal Samples: A Case
Study from the Tidewater Potomac. Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology No.

18. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C.
Ulrich, Laurel Thatcher
1998 Wheels, Looms, and the Gendered Division of Labor in Eighteenth-Century New
England. William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd
ser., 55(1):338.
2001 The Age of Homespun: Objects and Stories
in the Creation of an American Myth.
Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
University of Southern California Muslim Students
Association
2007 Fiqh-us-Sunnah, Volume 4: Al-Kafan (The
Shroud). Electronic document, http://
www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/law/fiqhussunnah/
fus4_61.html, accessed March 2007.
U.S. Bureau of the Census
1909 A Century of Population Growth: From
the First Census of the United States to
the Twelfth, 17901900. U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Van der Sleen, W. G. N.
1963 Bead-Making in Seventeenth-Century
Amsterdam. Archaeology 16(4):260263.
Van Horn, Elizabeth
1971 Iroquois Silver Brooches (As-Ne-As-Ga)
in the Rochester Museum. Rochester
Museum and Science Center, Rochester,
New York.
Vlach, John Michael
1978 Graveyard Decoration. In The Afro-American Tradition in Decorative Arts, edited by
John Michael Vlach, pp. 139147. University of Georgia Press, Athens.
Waldstreicher, David
1999 Reading the Runaways: Self-Fashioning,
Print Culture, and Confidence in Slavery
in the Eighteenth-Century Mid-Atlantic.
William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser.,
56:243272.
Wall, Diana diZerega
2000 Twenty Years After: Re-examining
Archaeological Collections for Evidence
of New York Citys Colonial African Past.
28:720.
References 393
Wallace, Maurice
2000 Are We Men? Prince Hall, Martin
Delaney, and the Masonic Ideal in Black
Freemasonry, 17751865. In National
Imaginaries, American Identities: The
Cultural Work of American Iconography,
edited by Larry J. Reynolds and Gordon
Hunter, pp. 182210. Princeton University
Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
Walls, William Jacob
1974 The African Methodist Episcopal Zion
Church: Reality of the Black Church. A.
M. W. Zion Publishing House, Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Watters, David R.
1994 Mortuary Patterns at the Harney Site
Slave Cemetery, Montserrat, in Caribbean Perspective. Historical Archaeology
28(3):5673.
Watts, John
1928 Letter Book of John Watts, Merchant
and Councillor of New York, January 1,
1762December 22, 1765. The John Watts
De Peyster Publication Fund Series, vol.
61. Collections of the New-York Historical
Society. New-York Historical Society, New
York.
White, Shane
1991 Somewhat More Independent: The End
of Slavery in New York City, 17701810.
University of Georgia Press, Athens.
White, Shane, and Graham White
1995a Slave Clothing and African-American
Culture in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth
Centuries. Past and Present 148:149186.
1995b Slave Hair and African American Culture in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth
Centuries. Journal of Southern History
61(1):4576.
Wilczak, C., R. Watkins, C. Null, and M. L. Blakey
2009 Skeletal Indicators of Work: Musculoskeletal, Arthritic and Traumatic Effects. In
Skeletal Biology of the New York African Burial Ground, edited by Michael
L. Blakey and Lesley M. Rankin-Hill,
Chapter 11. The New York African Burial
in Colonial New York, vol. 1, pt. 1. Howard University, Washington, D.C.
Wild, R. P.
1937 A Method of Bead-Making Practiced in the
Gold Coast. Man 37:9697.
Wilder, Craig Steven
2001 In the Company of Black Men: The African
Influence on African American Culture in
New York City. New York University Press,
New York.
Wilf, Steven Robert
1989 Anatomy and Punishment in Late Eighteenth-Century New York. Journal of
Social History 22:507530.
Wilkie, Laurie A.
1997 Secret and Sacred: Contextualizing the
Artifacts of African-American Magic
and Religion. Historical Archaeology
31(4):81106.
Windley, L. A.
1983 South Carolina. Runaway Slave Advertisements: A Documentary History from the
1730s to 1790, vol. 3. Greenwood Press,
Westport, Connecticut.
Wood, Alice
1974 A Catalog of Jesuit and Ornamental Rings
from Western New York State: Collections of Charles R. Wray and the Rochester
Museum and Science Center. Historical
Archaeology 8:83104.
Wray, C. F., and H. L. Schoff
1953 A Preliminary Report on the Seneca Sequence in Western New York,
15501687. Pennsylvania Archaeologist
23(2):5363.
Yamin, Rebecca (editor)
2000 Tales of Five Points: Working-Class Life
in Nineteenth Century New York. John
Milner Associates. Submitted to Edwards
and Kelcey Engineers, New York, and U.S.
General Services Administration, Region
2, New York.
Index
Individuals who are mentioned in historical accounts

but for whom no surname is given are listed here
alphabetically by first name.
Key to locators: Numeral without an accompanying
letter is the page number for a mention in text only;
numeral followed by f refers to a figure on that page;
similarly, n refers to a footnote and t to a table.
aanspreeker. See funeral inviters

Ackerman house, 48n
Act for Burying in Woollen, 260n
Act for Preventing Suppressing and Punishing the
Conspiracy and Insurrection of Negroes and
other Slaves, An, 131
Act for Regulating Slaves, An (1702), 129
Adam (African runaway), 280t, 284
Adegbolola, Chief Alagba Egunfemi, 375
Adinkra, 240
adornment. See personal adornment
advertisements. See newspapers in New York;
clothing descriptions in runaways advertisements;
runaways: advertisements for
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
(ACHP), 3, 5, 30
Africa, 373
culture in, Arabic observations of, 62
culture in, European observations of, 60, 62, 63,
64, 330
polities, variety of, 62
religion, variety of, 62
See also African origins of enslaved Africans
in New York; burial practices of Africans, in
Africa; burial sites for Africans: in Africa;
Central Africa; coffins, in Africa; West Africa;
West Central Africa
African Americans
participation in African American research, 31,
368
transformation from African to African American,
5, 368, 371, 373
See also Africans in New York; descendant
community; enslaved Africans in New York;
free Africans in New York
African Burial Ground, 41f, 46f, 65
access and entrances to, 44, 88, 149, 367
boundaries, 51f, 87, 88, 192
ditches as possible boundaries, 90, 91
eastern boundary, 70
fence lines as possible boundaries, 9091, 185
northern boundary, 48, 50f, 72f, 185, 191
southern boundary, 48, 7071, 71n
western boundary, 48, 70
British use of, 52, 53f, 73, 102, 191, 192
closure of, 53, 55, 55f, 65, 71, 90, 193
dates of use, approximate, 149
ditches within, 87, 9091
documented events, laws, and transactions that
affected the use of, 4344, 48, 52
dumping of waste within, 82, 90, 93, 93n (see
also pottery factories; pottery within graves and
burial grounds; tanneries)
encroachments on (see under impacts to graves
and burial grounds)
features (nonburial) relevant for understanding
cemeterys use, 87
fence lines within, 8788, 90 (see also Kalck
Hook FarmVan Borsum boundary)
filling in of areas within and around, 3, 74, 75, 184
first cartographic reference to, 44, 47f (see also
Mrs. Buchnerds Plan)
location, 1, 2f, 38, 51f, 53f, 55f, 69f, 70, 194f, 368
management of, 43, 120, 206
396 Index
northern portion, 88, 88f, 90
coffinless graves, higher frequency of, 90, 102,
110, 125, 198, 370
domestic refuse, higher frequency of, 90
estimated dates of use, 102, 103, 107
fewer interments, 90, 120, 123, 164
men, higher frequency of, 123, 125, 191, 370
southerly orientation of burials, 90, 113114
temporal relation to fences within cemetery, 90
weedy plants, higher frequency of, 90
origin, 6, 35, 42, 43, 367
ownership of, 87
size estimates, 70, 71, 73
streets laid out through, 75t
survey of, by Van Borsum Patent heirs, 87, 192
topography, 67, 69f, 82, 123 (see also distribution
of graves: as a reflection of the landscape)
See also burial population of the New York
African Burial Ground; grave robbing: within
the African Burial Ground; New York African
Burial Ground
African Burial Ground and the Commons Historic
District, 68f, 75t, 80f
African Burial Ground Memorial Site, 73, 86, 375
African Burial Ground National Historic Landmark,
43n, 67, 68f, 70f, 73, 76, 79f
boundaries given for, 71n
designation of the African Burial Ground as a
landmark, 5
size, 73, 367
African Burial Ground Project. See New York
African Diaspora, 6, 66, 110, 121f, 374
African Free School, 194
African independent churches, 58, 65, 192, 192n,
198, 373, 374. See also African Methodist
Episcopal (AME) Zion Church; Mother Zion; St.
Philips Church
African independent church movement, 64, 65
meetings of black Methodists, 64
African Lodge of New York, 344
African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Zion Church,
65, 192n, 374
African origins of enslaved Africans in New York,
61f, 110, 130t
Bight of Benin, 60
Gold Coast, 60
lack of European knowledge about, 60, 61f
Madagascar, 60, 130t
Niger Delta, 60
Senegambia, 60
Sierra LeoneLiberia, 60
West Central Africa, 60
See also trade in enslaved Africans; West Indian
origins of enslaved Africans in New York
Africans in New York, 60, 373
celebrations and holidays held by, 150
childrearing, 328329
efforts to stop depredations on burial grounds, 74,
192193
independent economic activity, 127, 128n, 150,
217
maintaining ties with African Burial Ground grave
sites, 52, 58, 74
maintenance of cultural practices, 373
marriage among, 37, 204, 329
African Society, 57, 57f, 65
members (see Dickenson, Abraham; Fortune,
Isaac; Frances, Peter; Francis, Lewis; Hall,
John; Hutson, William; Parker, James)
possible writers of the 1794 petition to New York
City Common Council, 53n
See also New York City Common Council:
petition to, 1795 (by the African Society
regarding the management of the African
cemetery at Chrystie Street)
age category, definition of. See under burial
population of the New York African Burial
Ground
aglets. See buttons and fasteners: aglets;
preservation and decomposition of artifacts:
buttons, cuff links, and aglets
Akan, 186, 240, 372
Akuapem, 329
Almshouse, 50f, 51f, 52, 64n, 69f, 127, 215, 369
establishment of, 44, 149
jail, 173
See also Common, the; orientation: Almshouse, as
a possible reference
Almshouse cemetery, 48, 173. See also grave
robbing: within the Almshouse cemetery
American Museum of Natural History, 356, 362
American Revolution. See Revolutionary War
American South, antebellum, 62. See also burial
practices of Africans, in North America; in the
American south; coffins, in America: in the
American South
amulets, 354, 360
luck ball, 360n
Andrew (African runaway), 270, 272t
Andrews, Edward, 284
Anglicans, 66, 129, 174, 192, 198
Index 397
affiliation for Africans, 37n, 38, 38t, 65
See also Society for the Propagation of the Gospel
in Foreign Parts; St. Georges Chapel; St. Pauls
Church; St. Philips Church; Trinity Anglican
Church
Anglican Society for the Propagation of the Gospel
in Foreign Parts. See Society for the Propagation
of the Gospel in Foreign Parts
Angola, 63
animism, 62
Annapolis, 240, 354
Ann Street. See Elk Street
Anthony Street. See Duane Street
Antigua, 65
Antony, Domingo, 38, 42n
Antonys, Willem, 40n
Arabic scholarship on Africa, 62
archaeological testing, prior to excavation, 73, 367
in Block 154, 1
in Foley Square Project, 1, 1n
guidelines for conducting (see research design;
Secretary of the Interiors Standards and
Guidelines for Archaeological Documentation;
Section 106 compliance; Section 110
Guidelines)
in Lot 12, 6
in Republican Alley, 3, 6
revealing the presence of remains and other
features, 3, 3n
targeting of areas with likely burials, 3, 6, 85
See also Foley Square Project; Foley Square
Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement;
Historic Conservation and Interpretation (HCI):
archaeological testing conducted by
Arkansas, 354
Army Corps of Engineers, 31, 33t. See also
inventory of excavations: by Army Corps of
Engineers
Artex, 29, 32t, 262, 287, 334, 341, 342, 351, 359
artifact inventories. See inventory of excavations
artifacts, recovery, condition, and treatment of, and
chain of custody for
aglets, 285, 287
beads, 334
buttons, 285, 287
coffin wood and hardware assemblage, 243245
coins, 349, 350t351t, 351
cuff links, 285, 287
pins, 260, 262263
pipes, 349, 350t351t, 351
rings and other jewelry, 341342
shells, 349, 350t351t, 351

artifacts in direct association with burials, 10, 87,
93, 109, 120
amber-colored glass sphere (Burial 410), 126,
164, 169, 321, 325, 333, 340, 349, 350t, 359,
360, 360f
calcite-crystal cluster (Burial 55), 164, 349, 351t,
362, 362f
categories, 24, 33t
clay ball with copper-alloy band (Burial 375),
164, 350t, 351, 359, 359f
cleaning of, 25, 26, 263, 285, 334, 342, 352, 364
conservation, 22, 2526, 84n, 364
copper-alloy rings (Burials 71, 115, 147, 242, 310,
and 398), 205, 288t, 289, 296, 307, 323t, 325,
327f, 328, 345f, 346f, 350t, 353, 359360, 360f,
364, 372
crockery (Burial 328), 65, 93, 363, 363f
dense and sparse areas of, 82, 92, 93, 103, 104
floral tributes, 32t, 120, 365366, 365n, 366t, 370
knives (Burials 48 and 214), 120, 205, 301, 349,
350t, 352, 353, 360362, 361f, 362f, 370
mica schist disk (Burial 135), 350t, 353, 362363,
363f
nails and tacks (not related to coffins) (Burials
138, 186, 197, and 310), 363364
ox shoe (Burial 15), 351, 351t, 364365, 364n,
365f
peach pit (Burial 217), 350t, 364
placement on top of graves, determination of, 30,
30n, 81, 93, 363
quartz crystal (Burial 289), 185, 349, 350t, 362,
362f
replication of, 28, 30t, 31f, 287, 314f, 342, 345f,
346f, 347f
unique artifacts, 26, 123, 126, 126f, 164, 293,
359n, 370
artifacts not related to the African Burial Ground,
1n, 33t, 77, 80t, 82, 87, 92n, 169
cleaning and conservation, 2526
sparse areas of, 93
Asante, 360
Ashanti, 354
Assento (African granted land), 40n
Atlantic trade, 330
beads, 332
imported to Britain, 332
imported to Holland, 332
imported to New York, 340
imported to Portugal, 332
imported to Spain, 332
398 Index
imported to West Africa, 331
by the British, 270, 270n, 282f, 331, 331n, 332t
cowries imported to Africa, 331, 331n, 332t, 341
by the Dutch, 331
European trade with West Africa, 331
fabric and clothing
from England, 282f, 283
to New York, 270, 282f, 283
to West Africa, 270n, 331, 331n
See also trade in enslaved Africans; trans-Saharan
trade
Atlantic world, 35, 59, 66, 330, 333
A. T. Stewart Store, 76
Austria, 331
Bancker, Evert, 174

baptism, 37, 149
Baptist churches, 129, 174
Barbados, 64, 107, 110n, 116, 324, 332, 357. See
also burial practices of Africans, in the West
Indies: in Barbados
Barclay family, 74, 75, 76, 102, 207
subdivision and development of the African Burial
Ground, 71, 192
See also Kalck Hook Farm
Barclay land. See Kalck Hook Farm
Barley Street. See Duane Street
Baster, John, 283
Battery Park, 2f
beads, 94, 370
in Africa, 341
age estimates, 340341
bead stringing as employment of enslaved African
women, 332
burials with, 109, 325, 335t336t, 340
characteristics and types, 325, 333334, 335t
336t, 337f339f
amber, 335t336t, 340
color and diaphaneity, 334, 335t336t, 339
decoration, 339, 340
facets, 328, 335t336t, 339, 340, 345f, 346f
luster, 339
powder-glass, 331, 334, 340
shape, 339, 340
size, 339, 340
waist beads, 126, 329, 371, 371n
importation of (see under Atlantic trade; transSaharan trade)
manufacturing techniques and places, 331, 334,
336, 339
in Africa, 133, 143, 328, 333, 340341

in Europe, 325, 331, 332, 333, 334, 339, 340, 341
in Newton Plantation cemetery, 340
sale of, 332
secondary modification, 334, 336, 339
trade in, 340
Beekman Street, 65, 194
Beeling, Abraham, 37n
Bell, John, 270
Benin, 63, 331
Bermuda, 356
Bight of Benin, 60, 331, 332t
Bight of Biafra, 332t
Black Brigade, 191
black landownership
African farms, 42, 42n, 368
land granted to Africans, by Dutch, 38, 39f, 40,
40n, 43
landowners, 38, 40n
Black Pioneers, 191
black refugees. See under runaways
Blakely, Mother Delois, 375, 375f
Blakey, Michael, 3, 5, 27, 375, 376
Bleeker Ten Eyck, Margaret, 271f
Block 153, 44, 80f
Block 154, 2f, 10n, 40, 44, 78f, 79f, 88
boundaries, 1, 68f, 367
development phases of, taken from excavated
features and deposits, 82
possible pottery waste within, 92
Block 155, 79f
Block 160, 1n
Block 184, 92
Bohemia, 331, 340
Book of Negroes, 192
Boston, 65, 268, 344
Bowery Road, 38, 40, 40n, 149
Bowling Green, 29
Bradford, William, 45f, 269. See also LyneBradford Plan
Brazil, 60, 356
Bridewell, 52, 173
Britain. See British, the
British, the, 42, 330, 332
departure from New York, 192
increased restrictions on New York Africans, 129,
131
seizure of Rutgerss property, 191, 192
takeover and occupation of New York, 52, 60, 88,
90, 102, 107, 191, 206, 213, 369
use of African workers during occupation, 191
Index 399
British Customs House, 340
British Headquarters Map, 53f
Broad Street, 333, 343, 344, 362
Broadway, 2f, 36f, 54f, 55, 68f, 69f, 72f, 74, 76, 87
as a boundary for the African Burial Ground, 1,
367
date of construction, 113
expansion northward, 43, 44, 113
as a possible western boundary for the African
Burial Ground, 42, 70
present day, 35, 38, 40n, 44n, 48n, 52, 71f, 129
ropewalk as eighteenth-century alignment, 71f
structure on Maerschalk Plan located on, 48, 50f
Bromley Map, 79f
Bronx, the, 10
Bronx Council of the Arts, 262, 287, 334, 341, 342,
351
Bruff, Charles Oliver, 333, 344
Buchnerd, Mrs. See Mrs. Buchnerds Plan
burial artifacts. See artifacts in direct association
with burials
burial dates and sequence of interment, diagnostic
indicators of
artifacts within burials, 5, 9394, 103, 105, 369
burial fees charged by John Teller, 102
coffinless burials in northern part of the cemetery,
102
coffin shape, 93, 96, 97, 103, 104, 105, 369
disturbed burials, 96
ditches within the African Burial Ground, 9091,
114
elevation of graves, 96, 103
faunal remains, presence or absence of, 9192,
207
fence lines within the African Burial Ground,
8788, 90, 369
floral tributes, 366
kiln waste, 9293, 94t, 102, 103, 104105, 369
pipes, 94t, 357n
sequence of interment, 94, 96, 97
site location (north of the fence) (see African
Burial Ground: northern portion)
stratigraphy and spatial analysis of burials, 93,
103, 104, 105, 369
superimposition of burials, 9495, 96, 103, 215
terminus ante quem, assignment of 93, 104
terminus post quem, assignment of, 93, 94, 94t,
96, 102, 104, 105, 369
See also church records; documentary recordation;
Early Group; Late Group; Late-Middle Group;
Middle Group; Teller phase; temporal

grouping
burial numbering. See excavation: burial numbering
burial population of the New York African Burial
Ground
adults, 107, 108f, 119f
age categories, 107
age distribution, 107, 108f
indeterminate ages, 108f
as a possible cause for burial patterns, 123
children and infants, 107
conditions of graves, 8284
deserters and prisoners of war, 52, 53f, 73, 102,
191
elevations of burials, 82, 83f, 94, 96, 103, 143,
169
family relationships, possibility of, 114, 116, 165,
171
intact graves, 3, 74, 76, 84, 85, 104, 168, 185 (see
also archaeological testing prior to excavation:
targeting of areas with likely burials)
mass graves, lack of, 52, 119
men, 107
Native American burials, possibility of, 43n
origins, 110, 187, 371, 373 (see also African
origins of enslaved Africans in New York; West
Indian origins of enslaved Africans in New
York)
possible African birth, 168, 186, 208, 371
population estimates of, 73, 73n
number of excavated burials, 73
number of graves identified, 8, 367
number of individuals for whom any skeletal
remains could be inventoried, 8, 367
sex distribution, 107
in burial spatial patterns, 123
subadults, 107, 119f
unexcavated burials, 73, 85, 367
unknown identities of African individuals, 64n,
147, 204
See also burial dates and sequence of interment,
diagnostic indicators of; reinterment; temporal
grouping; unique and unusual burials; women:
distinctive graves of
burial position. See burial practices, evidence of,
at the New York African Burial Ground: body
position
burial practices, evidence of, at the New York
adornment and other goods in direct association
with the deceased, 120, 127128
400 Index
body position, 109, 115
head, legs, arms, 115, 115t
unique positioning, 123, 126f
burial attire (shrouds, winding sheets, and street
clothes), 109, 115116, 120, 127
burial program, possible, 110
coffins and coffinless burials (see coffins, absence
of; coffins, presence of)
grave clusters, 116, 119
grave marking, 74, 109, 120, 121f, 122, 122f
likely presence in unexcavated areas, 370
unclear case for, as a typical burial practice, 369
grave orientation, 110111, 111f
alignment to neighboring graves, 114115
alignment to the path of the sun, 111113, 112f,
112t
alignment to physical features, 113114
homogeneity of, 109, 369
red ocher, 125, 125n, 327
shared graves, 109, 116, 117t119t (see also burial
population of the New York African Burial
Ground: family relationships, possibility of )
children interred with adults, 107
possibility of, 117t119t
spatial relationships, 109, 120, 122123, 124f, 369
variation, 109110, 115, 371
See also burial practices of Africans, in New
York; New York African Burial Ground;
Revolutionary War: possible effects on African
Burial Ground use
burial practices of Africans, in Africa
dance, 65
in Ghana, 63, 116, 240, 329, 357
grave goods and offerings in and atop graves,
6566, 359
in Nigeria, 63, 329, 331
personal adornment and other possessions, 63,
329, 341
shells and coral, 354355
shrouding or winding sheets, 63, 116, 259
transporting the body to the cemetery, 65
washing and laying out the dead, 63
in West Africa, 65, 66, 354355, 363, 368n, 372n
in West Central Africa, 66, 240, 354355, 363,
368n, 372n
See also coffins, in Africa; documentary
recordation: European observations in Africa;
Islam: influence on African burial practices;
pipes and pipe smoking: in Elmina, Ghana
burial practices of Africans, in New York, 354
announcing the death, 6263
funeral labor, 127

Islamic influence (see Islam: influence on African
burial practices)
mens roles, 63
nocturnal funerals, 65
oppression, effect of, 65, 102, 109
personal adornment and other possessions, 63
preparing the body for burial, 6364, 247, 248
selecting a grave site, 6465
shrouds or winding sheets, 63, 259
womens roles, 63
See also burial practices, evidence of, at the New
York African Burial Ground; coffins, in New
York; grave digger-sextons
burial practices of Africans, in North America, 362
in the American south, 63, 64, 65, 66, 260
in Boston, 65
coins, 353, 354
grave goods and offerings in and atop graves, 93,
364
grave markers, 66
music and dance, 65
personal adornment, 321, 342
in Philadelphia, 321, 343
shrouding practices, 63, 260
womens roles, 63
See also coffins, in North America
burial practices of Africans, in the West Indies
in Antigua, 65
in Barbados, 63, 64, 66, 116, 213n, 357
in the Caribbean, 60, 65
coins, 354
covering the grave, 66
grave goods and offerings in and atop graves, 66
grave markers, 66
in Jamaica, 63, 65, 66, 357, 361
in Montserrat, 354
music and dance, 65
in Newton Plantation cemetery, 111n, 116, 324,
329
personal adornment and other possessions, 63,
324, 329
shrouding and winding sheets, 63, 116
See also coffins, in the West Indies; pipes and pipe
smoking: in Jamaica
burial practices of Europeans, 115
Index 401
coins, 353
Dutch, 63n, 64, 64n
in England, 63n, 257, 258n, 259, 260, 260n, 353
influence on Africans, 214
shrouds and winding sheets, 63n, 258n, 259, 260,
260n (see also Act for Burying in Woollen)
See also coffins, in Europe
burial sites for Africans, 35, 6465
in Africa, 62
camp for Africans, permitted by Dutch West India
Company, 35, 36f, 128
first known reference to African burials on public
land, 35
on land undesirable for agricultural and residential
use, 42
in New Jersey, 35
in New York, 35, 37
possible burials within Peter Stuyvesants bowery,
35
in rural family cemeteries, 35, 226n
Burnet, John, 64n
buttons and fasteners, 370
aglets, 164, 205, 260, 261t, 265, 266t267t, 285,
286t, 287, 293, 294f, 301, 301f, 310, 311f
broken pieces, 285, 292, 293, 295, 297, 298f, 299,
300f, 301, 303f, 310, 315, 316
burials with, 265, 266t267t, 268269, 269t, 289,
290, 291320
problematic provenience, 265, 267t, 307
costs of, 285, 287
cuff links, 265, 266t267t, 268, 269t
decorative wear, evidence for, 287, 288t, 298,
298f, 299, 302f, 303, 304f, 305, 305f, 307, 313,
314, 316, 318
anchor design, 290292, 291f, 292f, 328
enamel, 268, 301, 311312
possible human portrait, 308, 308f
scalloped design as possible Tudor Rose, 297,
297f, 302, 310
differentiating between undergarments and outer
garments, 269
as evidence of clothing, 268
as evidence of nonclothing use, 265
frequency in men, 265, 268269, 269t
frequency in women, 265, 268
functions on clothing, 269, 284, 285, 291
locations, 266t267t, 268, 293, 296, 296f, 297, 299,
301, 302, 303, 304f, 308313, 314f, 318, 318f
manufacturing techniques and places, 289, 289t
in England, 289, 289t
recycling of, 285, 290
social uses
as a cultural practice, 269, 303, 317318
as talismans or mementos (see under amulets)
types of, 265, 268, 284, 284f, 288t289t, 328
bone-backed buttons with multiple perforations
(originally composite buttons with stamped
caps), 287, 289
bone backs or molds for thread-covered buttons,
287, 289
cast three-piece, all-metallic buttons, 291
cast two-piece, all-metallic buttons, 290291
composite buttons with stamped metal cap and
bone back with single hole for copper-alloy
wire loop shank, 290
composite buttons, wood with a nonmetallic
covering and copper-alloy wire loop shank,
289290
copper-alloy rings for thread- or cloth-covered
buttons, 289
cabinetmakers. See under occupations in New York

Caesar (African refused Freemason membership),
344
Calabar, 332
Calk Hook Farm. See Kalck Hook Farm
Campbell, John, 92
Campbell earthenware manufactory (Campbell
pottery), 92, 173
Canal Street, 38, 40
Caribbean, 62, 65, 151, 332, 356, 373, 374
as a slave-trade connection between West Central
Africa and New York, 60, 110, 129, 130, 330
Carlisle Bay, 332
carpenters. See under occupations in New York
Cartagena, Francisco, 40n
Carters Grove cemetery, 115, 215
Carwitham, John, 46f
Carwitham Plan, 44, 46f
Castello Plan, 36f
Catharine Market, 330
Cedar Grove Cemetery, 354
cemeteries. See burial sites for Africans
Central Africa, 60, 62, 64, 66, 371
Centre Street, 2f, 42
Chambers Street, 2f, 42, 44n, 52, 55, 67, 75, 76, 77,
79f, 173
barracks near, 48, 192
excavations on, revealing the presence of graves,
71n
history of, 75t
402 Index
Charles (African runaway), 284
Charleston, 65, 344, 367. See also under coffins, in
America; personal adornment
Charleton Street, 38
Charon, 353
Chief Cornplanter. See Cornplanter, Chief
children. See under burial population of the New
York African Burial Ground; coffins, in New
York; coffins, presence of; Middle Group;
mortality rates; population counts; preservation
and decomposition of human remains; temporal
grouping; trade in enslaved Africans; See also
distribution of graves; grave clusters: children;
distribution of graves; grave clusters: children
near adults; Early Group: burials belonging to:
children, low frequency of; personal adornment:
burials with: children and infants; pins: burials
with: children
chin cloths. See under shrouding and winding
sheets
cholera, 374
Christianity, 44, 66, 110
in Africa, 62
African participation in New York, 174, 192
attraction of Africans to, 63, 192
burial practices, 115
See also Anglicans; Baptist churches; Christ
Lutheran Church; French Church; German
Reformed churches; Great Awakening;
Huguenots; Lutherans; Methodist Church;
Moravian Church; Pinkster; Presbyterians;
Quakers; Reformed Dutch Church; Society for
the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts
Christ Lutheran Church, 37n, 174
Chrystie Street, 55
Chrystie Street cemetery, 53n, 57, 57f, 65
churches in New York, 173174, 374
affiliations of slaveholding households, 3738, 38t
African membership, 129, 149, 192
burials of Africans in, 149, 174
evangelical Protestant, 149
church records, 110
African burials, 37n, 52, 149, 174
Baptist churches, 174
Christ Lutheran Church, 37n, 174
French Church, extant records of, 37
Garden Street Dutch Church, scarcity of records,
37
German Reformed churches, 174
Jewish congregations, scarcity of records, 37
Lutheran congregations, 37, 37n, 174
Moravians, African burials within cemetery of,

37n, 174
Quaker meetings, scarcity of records, 37
Reformed Dutch Church, 37, 112, 113t, 149, 174
St. Georges Chapel, 174
St. Pauls Church, 174
Trinity Church African cemetery, 52, 112, 113t,
149
Church Street, 40, 52, 65
Church Street cemetery, 192, 192n
City Hall Park, 2f, 50f, 68f, 70, 70f, 78f
excavations in and near, revealing the presence of
graves, 71n
See also Common, the: overlap with presentday City Hall Park; impacts to graves and
burial grounds: building construction and city
development: on City Hall Park
Claes the Negro (African granted land), 40n
Clarke, George, 270
cleaning of remains. See excavation: cleaning of
remains
clothing and textile fragments, 259f, 294f, 317f,
352
association with metal clothing items, 260, 262f,
263, 265, 285, 301, 303, 305, 306f, 308, 311,
312, 312f, 315f, 320f
evidence of, 258, 299
explanations for the presence of both pins and
buttons, 258
frequency in men, 269, 269t
higher frequency in the presence of coffins, 214
pseudomorphs, 133, 261t, 263
types of clothing, 370
breeches, 164, 175, 189, 205, 258, 268, 270,
271f, 272t282t, 283, 284, 286t, 296, 299,
305, 313, 318, 327, 365
gowns, 265, 268, 270, 271f, 273t282t, 283,
283f, 283n, 284, 329
grommets, 265, 267t, 285, 311, 312f
jackets, 175, 205, 258, 268, 270, 272t278t,
283n, 284, 290, 291, 291f, 293, 293f, 327
laces, 164, 217t, 239, 258, 265, 270, 272t278t
petticoats, 270, 271f, 272t281t, 283, 284, 329
trousers, 164, 205, 265, 270, 272t274t, 283, 284,
299, 309, 323
undergarments, 258, 268, 269, 283, 284, 304, 313
waistcoats, 270, 272t282t, 283, 284, 287, 288t,
324
types of textiles, 260, 261t, 282, 286t
clothing of Africans, in New York, 265
mens attire, 270, 271f, 272t282t
Index 403
newspapers as a source of information (see under
newspapers in New York)
recycling and modification of, 285
types of fabric, 270
utilitarian, 248, 270, 283
well-dressed Africans, 282
women dressed as men, 268
womens attire, 270, 271f, 272t282t
See also under runaways: advertisements for
clothing in New York
fashion trends and styles, 283, 283n
homemade attire, 283
production of, 270
ready-made attire, 283, 284
terminology, 283
See also Atlantic trade: fabric and clothing: to
New York
Cobb Laboratory, 30, 262, 263, 296. See also
Howard University
coffin handles, 240. See also unique and unusual
burials: coffins: coffin handles
coffin lids, 135, 146, 186, 239, 243, 350, 355, 356,
372
coffin makers. See under occupations in New York
coffins, absence of, 103, 110, 110t, 128, 214t
comparison with Newton Plantation coffin use,
213n
covariation with age and sex, 213
covariation with presence of clothing, 214, 269
frequency in men, 191, 204, 370
possible explanations for
as a burial custom, 110, 198
economic hardship, 110, 198, 213
refusal of household head to provide coffin, 110,
198
as a result of the Revolutionary War, 191, 213,
269, 370
in relation to artifacts, 213
See also African Burial Ground: northern portion:
coffinless graves, higher frequency of; Late
Group: mortuary material culure: coffinless
burials; Late-Middle Group: mortuary material
culture: coffinless burials; temporal grouping:
based on coffinless burials; unique and unusual
burials: southerly orientation: and coffinless
coffins, in Africa
in the Gold Coast, 64, 110n
in Loango, 64
in the Niger Delta, 64
in West Africa, 214215
coffins, in America
in the American South, 64

in Carters Grove, 215
in Charleston, 215, 243
coffin shape, 215, 217
in a Delaware rural family cemetery, 226n
in First African Baptist Church Cemetery, 217
nail locations recorded, 226n
in New Orleans, 64
paint, 215
See also coffins, absence of; coffins, in New York;
coffins: presence of; Delaplaine, Joshua: daybook
that served as documentary record of coffins
purchased; unique and unusual burials: coffins
coffins, in Europe, 214
coffin shape, 215, 215n
construction, 175, 226n, 239
in England, 64, 175, 215, 226n, 239
influence on the use of coffins among Africans,
213n
See also coffins, absence of; coffins: presence of;
unique and unusual burials: coffins
coffins, in New York, 6364
adults, 218, 227t231t, 232t, 239
children and infants, 218, 219f, 222, 227t231t,
232, 232t, 233f, 239, 240, 241, 243
construction of, 214215, 214n, 220, 222, 224,
225f, 226f, 233
by enslaved Africans, possibility of, 64
inset lids, 222, 226, 226n
costs of, 215216, 216n, 216t, 217t, 232, 233,
239, 240, 241, 244 (see also Delaplaine, Joshua:
daybook that served as documentary record of
coffins purchased)
decoration, 213, 215216, 222, 233, 238t, 239
243, 244
nail locations, 224226, 225f, 232, 234t237t
provision of, 127, 204
by family and friends, 102, 216
by household heads, 102, 215, 216
by mutual aid associations, 217
screws, 232233, 233f, 238t, 239, 244, 245
shape, 97, 97f, 97n, 217218, 218t, 219f, 220,
221f, 222, 233t
size, 218
comparison with stature, 219221, 220f, 221f
types of wood, 97, 110, 216n, 221222, 223t,
224f, 227t231t, 232t, 233t, 243
variation in, 217
See also coffins, absence of; coffins, in America;
coffins: presence of; unique and unusual burials:
coffins
404 Index
coffins, presence of, 110, 110t, 127, 214t
of adults, 213214, 214t
of children, 204, 204n, 213
as a common practice, 109, 213
covariation with age and sex, 213
covariation with presence of clothing, 214
European influence on coffin use, 213n
possible enhancement of burial preservation, 213
in relation to artifacts, 213
See also unique and unusual burials: coffins
coffins, in the West Indies, 64
in Barbados, 64, 213n
in Newton Plantation cemetery, 110n, 213n
coffin shape. See under burial dates and sequence
of interment, diagnostic indicators of; coffins, in
America; coffins, in Europe; see coffins, in New
York: shape; temporal grouping: based on coffin
shape
coins, 351, 351n, 352f, 353f
burials with, 349, 349n, 350t351t, 351, 351n
problematic cases, 351t
George II halfpennies, identification as, 352, 352f,
353, 353f
locations within burials, 352, 352f, 354f
placement over the eyes as a burial practice, 351,
353354
pragmatic and spiritual uses in burial, 354
Collect Pond, 40, 40n, 43, 44, 47f, 48, 68f, 82, 96,
368
draining of, 70, 70n
filling in of, 75
landscape of, 67
location, 38, 39f, 49f, 50f, 69f
as a southern boundary of eighteenth-century New
York, 129, 129n
uses of, 129, 129n
Collect Pond, Little, 44, 67, 70, 87, 91, 129
College Landing site, 226n, 248n
College of William and Mary, 3, 375
Colonial Williamsburg, 28, 31f, 287, 342
clothing collection of, 270f, 271f, 283f, 285f
See also Williamsburg
Colve, Governor
patent granted to Cornelis Van Borsum, 40, 41f, 43
See also Van Borsum Patent
Common, the, 38, 44, 45f, 50f, 52, 67, 149, 150
conflation with Van Borsum Patent, 40
grazing on, 67
overlap with present-day City Hall Park, 43
as a possible site for African burials, 42
public use, effect of, on African Burial Ground

boundaries, 70
as a site for executions, 43, 44, 129
uses of, 129
See also Almshouse; Almshouse cemetery; City
Hall Park
Common Council. See New York City Common
Council
conditional freedom, 38, 38n
in exchange for military support, 191
See also manumission
Congo, Simon, 38, 42n
Congo, the, 63
conservation procedures. See artifacts in direct
association with burials: conservation; artifacts
not related to the African Burial Ground: cleaning
and conservation; excavation: conservation
procedures
Cornplanter, Chief, 343
Corselius Pottery, 49f, 149
Cortelyou, Jacques, 36f
Court Square building, 79f
cowrie shells, 321, 333
burials with, 126, 127f, 322t, 325, 341, 341f, 356n
costs of, 332t
fragments and shells not recovered from burials,
126, 341
importation of (see Atlantic trade: cowries
imported to Africa; trans-Saharan trade:
cowries)
possible origins of, 341
presence in Newton Plantation Cemetery, 324
provision and acquirement, 332
total number found during excavation, 126, 341
use as money, 331
use of shells in Fort Frederiksborg, 330
crime and punishment, 49f, 193
burning at the stake, 44, 49f, 150
hangings, 44, 49f, 150
theft of clothing, 150n, 259, 270, 283
theft of goods, 128, 333, 344
See also executions; Great Conspiracy of 1741;
1712 Uprising
Cripplebush, 38, 39f
Crolius, William, 44, 92
Crolius Pottery works, 45f, 46f, 48n, 49f, 92, 149,
363, 368369
location, 149
possible kiln waste within the African Burial
Ground, 92, 149
Index 405
Cross Street, 64, 192n
Cuffee (African refused Freemason membership),
344
cuff links. See under buttons and fasteners
cultural practices, African Burial Ground
population, 329
dental modification, 168, 186, 208, 209
as an indicator of African birth, 208, 239
Daily Advertiser, 52, 52n, 192

Damen, Jan Jansen, 39f
land granted to, 40
Damen Patent, 39f, 43, 70
division of land after Jan Jansen Damens death,
40
overlap with the African Burial Ground, 40
ownership of, 40
Danckaerts, Jasper, 40, 40n
database, archaeological. See laboratory analysis:
archaeological database
Day, Samuel, 65
daylight burials, 43, 164. See also laws, regulations,
and ordinances: law, 1722 (New York Common
Council, restricting burials of slaves to daylight
hours)
Deall, Samuel, 333
DeForeest, Henry, 269
Delancey estate, 57
Delaplaine, Joshua, 64
daybook that served as documentary record of
coffins purchased, 5859, 64, 64n, 215216,
216n, 216t, 239, 241
Delaplaine, Samuel, 57
Delaware, 226n
Delaware River, 362
Denniston, Daniel, 56f
dental modification. See under cultural practices,
African Burial Ground population
descendant community, 375
participation in topics of concern for the New
York African Burial Ground Project, 31, 368
See also African Americans; Africans in New York
development and construction in New York, 52, 55,
55f, 82, 129
A. T. Stewart Store, removal of burials during
construction of, 76
barracks, 48, 71, 173, 192, 369
benefits to eighteenth-century merchants and
artisans as a result of, 173
Block 154, development on, 75, 76 (see also

Block 154: development phases of, taken from
excavated features and deposits)
as a cause for superimposed burials, 71
commercial development, 74, 76, 149
continuation of burials during, 75
filling in of areas, 7576
lot development, 7475, 80t, 88
residential development, 58, 71, 77f, 78f, 79f, 149,
173, 369
de Voe, Thomas, 330
Dickenson, Abraham, 57f
direct importation of enslaved Africans. See under
trade in enslaved Africans
Directory Plan of 1789, 55f
distribution of graves, 5
British occupation of New York, effect of, 73n,
90, 102, 107, 206, 213, 369, 370, 373
cosmogram, grave arrangement as a possible, 184
gendered space in later burials, 206
preponderance of men, 206
grave clusters, 71, 133, 142f, 207, 370
children, 144, 145, 145f, 166
children near adults, 9596, 116, 144, 166, 168,
186
explanations for, 206
individual interment, 22, 116, 120, 165, 369
isolate burials, 94, 96, 103, 105, 120, 146147,
206207, 325
paired burials, 144, 169, 206
reconstruction of stratigraphy, 5, 9495, 95f, 133,
167
as a reflection of the landscape, 82, 123, 143, 164,
184, 206, 207
sloping ground, 82, 96, 113, 114, 143, 146, 164,
206
in relation to surrounding burials, 95, 96
rows of graves, 123, 124f, 166, 185, 206, 207,
325, 327, 370
shared graves, 131, 144, 232, 257f, 370
children interred with adults, 143, 144f
possibility of, 168, 169, 170f, 185
sparsely populated areas of burials, 73, 90, 102,
123, 164, 368
superimposed burials, 94, 96, 103, 104, 123, 166,
215
as a possible result of cemetery reuse, 143, 165
as a result of development, 71, 369
Doctors Riot, 193
406 Index
documentary recordation
adornment purchases from Samuel Dealls
account books, 333
African participation in Christianity, 174
Arabic scholarship on cultural practices in Africa,
62
burial practices in Africa, 62, 63, 64
burial practices in New York, 5860, 62, 64 (see
also Sharpe, John: account on African burial
practices in New York; laws, regulations, and
ordinances: amendment, 1731, to 1722 law)
burial practices in the West Indies, 64, 66
coffin use, 64
coffin paint, 241, 243
travelers accounts on coffin use, 214215
court records used as evidence for possible fence
lines within the African Burial Ground, 87
European observations in Africa, 60, 62, 63, 64,
66, 330
of grave diggersextons, 6465
grave goods, historical evidence for, 66
newspaper accounts on grave robbing and
dissection of deceased Africans, 192
observations on African societies, 62
confiscations of belongings observed by William
Hugh Grove, 332
limited knowledge of, 60, 61f
See also A. T. Stewart Store; church records
Dodd, R. H., 39f
drawings, burial. See field recording of excavations:
burial drawings
Duane Street, 1, 2f, 6, 40, 42, 52, 67, 68f, 81, 82,
367
development of, 75, 88
filling in of, 75t, 83
history and former names of, 74, 75t
lots on or near, 54f, 74, 75, 88, 192
Dunmore, Lord
proclamation of freeing enslaved and indentured
servants in exchange for military support, 191
Dutch, the, 42, 331, 333, 358, 368
Africans captured and brought to New Amsterdam
from ships of, 60
households with enslaved Africans in New York,
38
rule and occupation of New York, 37, 38n, 39f,
129
See also burial practices of Europeans: Dutch;
Dutch West India Company; Native Americans:
trade in adornments and goods with Europeans;
Reformed Dutch Church
Dutch Reformed Church. See Reformed Dutch

Church
Dutch West India Company, 36f
African burials within cemetery of, 128
African burials within camp, permitted by, 35
conditional freedom granted to Africans by, 38,
38n
land granted to Africans by, 38, 39f, 40, 40n, 43
land granted to Jan Jansen Damen, 40
Dutens, Charles, 343
Duyckink, Gerardus, 50f
Dyckman family, 329
Dyott, General William, 332
Early Group, 97, 98f101f, 103105, 136f, 142f,

369
age and sex distribution, 141f
burials belonging to, 103, 131, 134t135t, 145f
children, low frequency of, 119, 131
lack of burials north of fence line, 133
locations of heavily concentrated burials, 133
grave clusters and superimposed burials, 142,
143144, 143n
discernment of, as a result of partial
excavation, 146
orientation of burials among, 133, 135, 142
problematic assignments to, 131, 144146
central concentration, 143146
dates, hypothetical, 129
eastern concentration, 140f, 146
mortuary material culture
abundance of beads, 133
burial artifacts, 132133
cloth, 133
coffin use, 131132, 232
grave markers, 135, 142143
pins, 247, 248
unique and unusual burials, 146148
western concentration, 135, 137f, 142143
Edwards and Kelcey Engineers, 1
glise du Saint Esprit, 37
Egypt, 331. See also trans-Saharan trade: beads
Elk Street, 1, 2f, 44, 54f, 56f, 67, 68f, 77f, 79f, 81,
367
fill within, 3, 76
history and former names of, 75t
modern view of, 70f
Elmina, 110n, 116, 331, 335t, 341, 357. See also
burial practices of Africans, in Africa; in Ghana
Elm Street. See Elk Street
Index 407
empty-coffin burials, 8, 9t, 21t, 74, 85t, 117t, 147
148, 152153t, 171, 176t, 185. See also grave
robbing: as a possible cause of empty-coffin
burials; unique and unusual burials: empty-coffin
burials
England. See English, the
English, the, 42, 129, 150n, 173, 282, 331, 333,
357, 358
38
See also buttons and fasteners: manufacturing
techniques and places: in England; burial
practices of Europeans: in England; coffins, in
Europe: in England
enslaved Africans in New York, 35, 42, 52, 66, 149,
191
coffin making, possibility of (see coffins, in
New York: construction: by enslaved Africans,
possibility of)
ethnic diversity, 60, 110, 130, 215, 349
restriction on the activities of, 44, 129, 131 (see
also Act for Regulating Slaves, An [1702]; laws,
regulations, and ordinances)
environmental impact statement, 1, 3
epidemics, 114115, 119.
Europeans
executions of, as a result of the 1741 Great
Conspiracy, 44
landowners in and around the African Burial
Ground, 40
takeover of African farms, 42
types of clothing worn by, 270
excavation
analysis not undertaken during excavation, 22n
areas of, 4f
burial numbering, 810, 9t
of burials, 10, 11t21t
catalog numbering assigned, 10, 2425, 25t, 26
cleaning of artifacts, 2526, 334, 341, 342
cleaning of remains, 262, 285, 296, 301, 308, 325,
334
coffin wood samples taken, 10, 25, 25n
conservation procedures, 22, 25, 85n, 334
elevations taken, 8, 10
absolute elevations, conversion from recorded
depths, 8, 94, 96
fill, determining depth of, 3
halt of, 3, 6, 22, 85, 85n
hand excavation, 6, 8, 77
loss of information and artifacts, 341, 351
regarding location of artifacts within burial, 10
prevention of, 24
machine excavation, 6, 8, 77, 81, 122, 369 (see
also impacts to graves and burial grounds:
during excavation: machine excavation)
partial excavation, 146, 169
shelters constructed to shield exposed graves and
excavators, 6, 7f, 8
site clearing, 7f, 8
site datum, establishment of, 8
site grid, establishment of, 6, 111, 111n, 112t, 112f
site maps used, 10n
soil
samples as a source of information, 22, 22n, 26,
26n
screening for artifacts, 10, 26
soil conditions, 8284
See also field recording of excavations; laboratory
analysis
executions, 49f, 119, 173, 209
the executed possibly interred in the African
Burial Ground, 131
as a result of Great Conspiracy of 1741, 131,
150
See also Common, the: as a site for executions;
crime and punishment; Europeans: executions
of, as a result of the 1741 Great Conspiracy
Fair Street, 194

Fanny (African runaway), 270, 273t
fasteners. See buttons and fasteners
faunal remains. See burial dates and sequence
of interment, diagnostic indicators of: faunal
remains, presence or absence of; impacts to
graves and burial grounds: tannery waste;
preservation and decomposition of artifacts:
animal bones in grave-shaft fill; tanneries
Federal Courthouse, 1n
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA),
29
Federal Plaza, 2f
Fell, Christopher, 215, 216t
fences and fence lines. See African Burial Ground:
boundaries: fence lines as possible boundaries;
African Burial Ground: fence lines within;
African Burial Ground: northern portion:
temporal relation to fences within cemetery;
indicators of: fence lines within the African
Burial Ground; documentary recordation: court
records used as evidence for possible fence
408 Index
lines within the African Burial Ground; Kip,
Jacobus: possible construction of a fence within
the African Burial Ground; maps, historical:
appearance of lines as possible fences; orientation
of burials: fence lines, as a possible reference;
Teller, Isaac: construction of a fence within the
African Burial Ground; Teller, John: construction
of a fence within the African Burial Ground
Fetu, 330
field recording of excavations
burial drawings, 10, 22, 23, 9495
field forms, 22, 23
flotation, 25t, 26, 32t, 301, 365, 365t
freezing of samples, 22, 25, 32t, 243n, 244, 341
missing items, 30, 85t, 266t267t, 285, 296, 311,
351t, 356, 363
photographs of artifacts and remains, 10, 23,
2728, 29f (see also September 11, 2001: loss
of artifact photographs)
soil conditions, 85n
variation of, among individual excavators, 22, 84n
See also archaeological testing, prior to
excavation; excavation; laboratory analysis
First African Baptist Church Cemetery, 66, 354. See
also under coffins, in America
Five Points Site, 1n, 24, 24n.
Fletcher, Governor, 42
floral tributes. See under artifacts in direct
association with burials; burial dates and
sequence of interment, diagnostic indicators of;
pollen analyses
Florida, 332, 343t
flotation. See under field recording of excavations
Foley Square, 68f
Foley Square Project, 1, 1n, 24, 24n. See also
storage of artifacts and remains: Foley Square
Project excavations; 290 Broadway site
Foley Square Project Draft Environmental Impact
Statement, 3. See also archaeological testing,
prior to excavation
Fort Frederiksborg, 330
Fort Michilimackinak, 343t
Fortune, Isaac, 57, 57f
France. See French, the
Frances, Peter, 57f
Francis, Lewis, 57f, 65
Franklin Street, 129
Fraunces, Samuel, 344
free Africans in New York, 42, 43, 52, 129, 131,
193, 194, 214, 260, 332
counted separately from the enslaved (1790), 60
Freemasonry, 344
refusal of membership to Africans, 344
Free Masons, 344
French, the, 330, 331, 333, 343t
38
See also French Church; Huguenots
French and Indian Wars. See Seven Years War
French Church, 37. See also Huguenots
French Protestants. See Huguenots
French West Indies, 64
Fresh Water Pond. See Collect Pond
Fueter, Daniel, 321, 343
funeral inviters, 62
duties of, 62n, 64n
funeral practices. See entries for burial practices
fur trade, 343
Garden Street Dutch Church, 37

Gehring, Charles, 40n
General Services Administration (GSA), 1, 1n, 5,
6, 8, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 85, 245, 367,
368n
adopting full excavation, 3
determining levels of mitigation, 3
Georgia, 66
Ghana, 110n, 186, 240, 336t, 340, 341, 372, 376f.
See also burial practices of Africans, in Africa: in
Ghana
Gold Coast, 63, 66, 330, 331, 332t, 341. See also
African origins of enslaved Africans in New
York: Gold Coast; coffins, in Africa: in the Gold
Coast
Gold Street, 65, 194
Gold Street cemetery, 52, 55f, 192
availability for African burials, 5253
See also grave robbing: within the Gold Street
cemetery
grave clusters. See under burial practices, evidence
of, at the New York African Burial Ground;
distribution of graves
grave digger-sextons, 37, 44, 62, 110, 168, 192
possible placement of graves by, 95, 114, 115,
120, 144f, 147, 165, 166, 168, 171, 205, 206
See also documentary recordation: of grave
digger-sextons; occupations of Africans: grave
digger-sextons; Williams,Peter, Sr.
grave goods. See under burial practices of Africans,
in Africa; burial practices of Africans, in the West
Indies; documentary recordation
Index 409
grave markers
cobbles as grave markers, 32t, 74, 121f, 122, 122f,
142, 143, 166, 184, 369, 372
headstones, 37n, 66, 74, 184
See also impacts to graves and burial grounds:
during excavation: lost opportunities to examine
grave markers and tops of graves; See also
under burial practices of Africans, in New York;
burial practices of Africans, in the West Indies;
orientation; preservation and decomposition of
artifacts
grave robbing, 52, 65
within the African Burial Ground, 52n, 74, 192
within the Almshouse cemetery, 52n
within the Gold Street cemetery, 53, 185, 192, 210
as a possible cause of empty-coffin burials, 148, 171
protests from the New York African community,
74, 192193
within Trinity Church African cemetery, 52n
Gray, Scipio, 53, 55f, 65, 192, 194
Gray, Virgil, 65
Great Awakening, 149
Great Barrington, 359n
Great Conspiracy of 1741, 44, 49f, 149. See also
executions: as a result of Great Conspiracy of
1741
Great Fire of September 1776, 191
Great George Street, 40, 44, 70. See also Broadway
Great Lakes, 343
Greek burial practices, 353
Greenwood, John, 259f
Grim, David, 44n, 49f
Grim Plan, 44, 49f, 92
ground surface, original eighteenth-century, 30, 58,
81, 120, 135
lost opportunity to examine, during African Burial
Ground excavation, 8, 369
materials found in grave shafts used for the
reconstruction of, 82
within Republican Alley, 8, 96, 363
Grove, William Hugh, 332
Guinea, 331, 331n, 332t
Gulf of Guinea, 356
Gulf of Mexico, 356
Hall, John, 57f

Hallet, Samuel, 239240
Hall of Records, 79f
Hanibal (African runaway), 273t, 283
Hannah (African convicted of clothing theft), 270
headstones. See under grave markers

Hector (African runaway), 270
Henrietta Marie, 332
Hermans, Augustine, 42n
Historic Conservation and Interpretation (HCI), 23,
26, 74n
archaeological testing conducted by, 3
excavation conducted by, 6
hiring of, by Edwards and Kelcey Engineers, 1
laboratory analysis conducted by, 22
honewort. See under pollen analyses
Howard University, 3, 26n, 31, 367, 371n, 375
inventory and analysis conducted by laboratory
staff, 26, 245, 260, 364
postexcavation research conducted by, 5
public engagement, addressing topics of concern,
368
Howard University Archaeology Team (HUAT), 6,
24, 26, 27, 208n, 244, 262, 263, 285, 286t, 293,
297, 307, 311, 334, 342, 351
Howard University Cobb Laboratory. See Cobb
Laboratory
Hudson River, 2f, 38
Hudson Street, 38
Huguenots, 37, 129
as a church affiliation for Africans, 38t
Hunter, Governor, 43
Hunters Key, 64
Hutson, William, 57f
impacts to graves and burial grounds, 75, 96, 208,

247
areas of high disturbance, 145, 147, 164, 168
building construction and city development, 48,
80f, 93, 123, 125, 133, 143, 145, 232, 328, 354
on Bridewell, 52
on Broadway, 8, 80t, 173
on City Hall Park, 73
on Lots 1218, 80t
on the palisade wall in New Amsterdam/New
York, 73
on Reade Street, 8, 77, 80t
on the 290 Broadway site, 8081, 82f, 369
during excavation, 77, 8081, 316
lost opportunities to examine grave markers and
tops of graves, 78, 122, 184
machine excavation, 8, 77, 354, 369
pressure to speed excavation, 80, 81
encroachment on, 40, 44, 48, 71, 74, 82, 102, 149,
173, 368369
410 Index
grave robbing and possible dissection, 52, 74, 192,
210
interments of prisoners by British army, 73
as an obstacle to assigning a terminus post quem,
93
by other burials, 144, 144f, 171, 185
by pottery works, 73, 303, 307
tannery waste, 7374, 303, 307
truncated burials, 80t, 95, 102, 103, 104, 166
See also Africans in New York: efforts to stop
depredations on burial grounds; development
and construction in New York
importation of Africans. See trade in enslaved
Africans
indentured servants, 191, 215
Indian Ocean, 341
Industrial Revolution, 173
Institute for Historical Biology at the College of
William and Mary, 375. See also College of
William and Mary
insurrection, armed. See Great Conspiracy of
1741; revolt as a form of African resistance;
Revolutionary War; 1712 Uprising
Interpretive Center for the African Burial Ground,
28, 31
inventory of excavations, 24, 26, 26n, 27, 29, 32t
adornment, 342, 345347
animal bone, 26, 28t, 207
by Army Corps of Engineers, 262, 263, 287, 334,
341, 342, 351
beads, 334
buttons and fasteners, 287, 291320, 351n
coffin hardware, 26, 239, 243
cowrie shells, 341
crockery, 363
pins, 247n, 260, 262, 263
pipes, 357n, 351, 358
soil samples, 26
stoneware, 26
unique artifacts, assigning point numbers to, 26
Iroquois, 43n, 343t
artisans of silver adornment, 343
See also Native Americans
Isaac Royall House, 362
Islam
in Africa, 62
African participation, 63, 198
coffinless burials, association with, 198
influence on African burial practices, 63
possible Muslim burial in African Burial Ground
population, 146
shrouding practices, 258, 260, 260n

Island of Manhattan. See Manhattan Island
Ivory Coast, 186, 240, 360, 372
Jack (African runaway), 284

Jacobson, Captain, 344
Jamaica, 63, 357, 361. See also burial practices of
Africans, in the West Indies: in Jamaica
Jansen Damen, Jan. See Damen, Jan Jansen
Jenney (African runaway), 270, 272t
Jersey Nanny, 259f
jewelry. See under personal adornment
Jewish households with enslaved Africans in New
York, 38
Jewish synagogues, 37, 129
John Milner Associates (JMA), 1n, 5, 26, 27, 74n,
351
archaeological consultant to General Services
Administration, during field excavations, 3, 6
excavation conducted by, 6
laboratory analysis conducted by, 24, 244, 245,
285, 342
John Street Methodist Church, 64, 65
African membership, 174, 192, 192n
joiners. See under occupations in New York
Jones building, 79f
Jordan, Queen Mother, 375
Jordan River, 353
Kalch Pond. See Collect Pond

Kalck Hook Farm, 42, 67, 68f, 75t, 192
boundary with Van Borsum Patent (see Kalck
Hook FarmVan Borsum boundary)
draining of, by Anthony Rutgers and heirs, 70
landowners of, 43, 44n
location, 40
possible boundaries separating the farm from the
African Burial Ground, 48, 72f
survey and division into lots, 52, 54f, 74
See also Damen Patent; Lot 12
Kalck Hook FarmVan Borsum boundary, 50f, 71,
72f, 75, 78f, 79f, 87, 88, 102, 368
as a possible reference for burial orientation,
113114
See also African Burial Ground: northern portion
Kemble, Fanny, 63
Key West, 332
Kiersted, Catherine, 56f
Kiersted, Hans, 42
Index 411
Kiersted, Lucas, 42, 56f
Kiersted, Rachel, 56f
Kingston, 332, 362
Kip, Henry, 52
Kip, Jacobus
petition to the city for survey of the Van Borsum
Patent, 42, 43, 88
possible construction of a fence within the African
Burial Ground, 88
Kip, Johannis, 42, 43
Kip family, 48n, 74, 76
subdivision and development of the African Burial
Ground, 71
Kip land. See Van Borsum Patent
knives. See under artifacts in direct association with
burials
Kongo, 66
Kuranko, 63
laboratory analysis, 2324

archaeological database, 24, 27, 28t
beads and personal adornment, 341, 342
coffin wood samples, 243244
for which no analysis was done, 243, 243n, 244
locations from which samples came, 243
conductors and facilities (see Bowling Green;
General Services Administration; John Milner
Associates; World Trade Center)
coral identified as Siderastrea siderea, 356
nails and tacks, 364
ox shoe, 364
pins, 247n, 260, 262263
See also excavation; field recording of excavations
labor of enslaved Africans
British use of Africans during occupation of New
York, 191192
demand for, 151
domestic labor, 131, 151, 283
earliest known cartographic reference to, 36f
See also grave digger-sextons
Landmarks Preservation Commission. See New
York City Landmarks Preservation Commission
Landover, 29, 262, 287, 334, 341, 342, 351, 359
Late Group, 97, 98f101f, 102103
burials belonging to, 194, 195t198t, 199f202f
isolated infants, 206207
orientation, 198, 205, 206, 207, 209, 210f
paired, 206
rows, 205206
skeletal elements displaced, with, 208210

date span, approximate, 191
east-central area, 202f
mortuary material culture, 204205
coffinless burials, 198, 204, 204t, 269
coffin shape, 204
evidence of clothing, 205, 205n, 268
jewelry, 205
miscellaneous items, 205
pins, 205, 208, 209, 248
west-central area, 201f
western area, 200f
Late-Middle Group, 98f101f, 369
age and sex distribution, 175t, 183f
burials belonging to, 174, 176t177t, 178f182f
grave clusters, 184186
grave markers, 184
orientation, 177, 188
preservation of, 175
problematic assignments to, 185
spatial analysis, 175, 177, 184
east-central and Lot 18 areas, 181f, 185
eastern area, 182f
mortuary material culture, 174175
coffin decoration, 175, 185, 186188, 186f, 187f,
188f, 239
coffinless burials, 174175
coffin shape, 175, 188
evidence of clothing, 175, 189, 268
lock of hair, 188
pins, 175, 186, 187, 188, 248
overlap with Late Group, 102, 105, 173
overlap with Middle Group, 105, 173
southeast area, 185186
west-central area, 180f, 184185
western area, 179f, 184
laws, regulations, and ordinances
amendment, 1731, to 1722 law (prohibiting more
than 12 slaves from attending a funeral, and
prohibiting the use of palls), 44, 58, 64, 65, 131
law, 1722 (New York Common Council,
restricting burials of slaves to daylight hours),
43, 58, 65, 164
law, 1735 (prohibiting African workers from
wearing fancy, colorful fabrics), 282
law, 1740 (restrictions on the marketing of
produce), 150
prevention of property ownership, 131
412 Index
restriction on African independent economic
activity, 128n, 150
restrictions on interactions of free and enslaved
Africans, 131
See also Act for Burying in Woollen; Act for
Preventing Suppressing and Punishing the
other Slaves, An; Act for Regulating Slaves, An
Lehman College, 10
Lehman Laboratory, 10, 26. See also storage of
artifacts and remains: by Lehman Laboratory
Lenape, 43n. See also Native Americans
Leonard Street, 65
Liberia, 63. See also Sierra LeoneLiberia
Liberty Street, 129
literacy of enslaved and free Africans in New York,
43
Little Collect Pond. See Collect Pond, Little
Loango, 64, 372n
London, 46f, 214n, 215, 284, 321, 331n, 332, 333,
344
Long Island, 35, 125n, 330
Lord Dunmore. See Dunmore, Lord
Lords of Trade, 43
Lot 1, 44n
Lot2, 43
Lot 3, 44n
Lot12, 75, 88
clearing for archaeological excavation, 8
ditches within, 87, 90, 91, 114, 205
intact burials within and near, 3, 7677
kiln waste within, 92, 92n
Lot 13, 75, 88, 133, 164, 166, 170f, 207
intact burials near, 7677
building construction and city development: on
Lots 1218
Lot 14, 75, 88, 207
Lots 1218
Lot 15, 75, 76f, 88, 168, 207
Lots 1218
Lot 16, 75, 76, 76f, 81, 88, 164, 207. See also
impacts to graves and burial grounds: building
construction and city development: on Lots
1218
Lot 17, 75, 76, 85, 88

survey and lease of, 207
Lots 1218
Lot 18, 76, 85, 100f, 139f, 161f, 164, 168169,
181f, 202f, 207. See also impacts to graves
and burial grounds: building construction and
city development: on Lots 1218; Late-Middle
Group: east-central and Lot 18 areas; Middle
Group: east-central and Lot 18 areas
Lot 19, 85
Lot20, 3, 207
Lot 20, 3, 76, 85
Lot 21, 3, 76, 85, 207
Louis (African runaway), 284
luck ball. See under amulets
Lutherans, 37, 129, 174. See also Christ Lutheran
Church; church records: Lutheran congregations;
Trinity Lutheran Church; United Lutheran
Church
Lyne, James, 44, 45f, 46f
Lyne-Bradford Plan, 44, 45f, 46f, 71f, 113
Lyne survey, 92
macrobotanical analysis. See New South

Associates: macrobotanic, palynology, and
parasitology pilot studies
Madagascar, 63. See also African origins of
enslaved Africans in New York: Madagascar
Madin, Philip, 66
Maerschalk, Francis, 50f
Maerschalk Plan, 48, 50f, 72f, 87
Maldives, 341
Mali Empire, 331
Manatus Map, 36f
Manhattan, 1, 2f, 38, 39f, 59, 62, 67, 282, 321, 332,
343,
African community in, 35, 42, 58, 60, 128n, 269,
270, 323, 324, 367, 373
changing political geography of, 40
position of sun at sunset, used for site grid, 112f
See also New York City
Manhattan Alley. See Republican Alley
Manhattan Island, 42
Manhattan Place. See Republican Alley
Manuel, Groote, 40n
manumission, 40, 129, 192n, 373
purchase of, raising bond prices, 131
See also conditional freedom
Index 413
maps, historical
appearance of lines as possible fences, 87, 88, 88f
overlap of excavation site with historical maps,
71f, 72f
1787 surveyors map, 54f
1795 surveyors map, 56f
See also British Headquarters Map; Bromley
Map; Carwitham Plan; Castello Plan; Directory
Plan of 1789; Grim Plan; Lyne-Bradford
Plan; Maerschalk Plan; Manatus Map; Mrs.
Buchnerds Plan; Perris Map; Ratzer Map;
Sanborn Map; Taylor-Roberts Plan
Mary (African buried at Trinity Anglican Church),
174
Maryland, 29, 262, 287, 333, 334, 341, 342, 351,
354, 359
Massachusetts, 359n, 362
mass graves. See burial population of the New York
African Burial Ground: mass graves, lack of
Mauritania, 340
McComb, John, Jr., 55f
mechanical clearing. See excavation: machine
excavation
Medford, Massachusetts, 362
Methodist Church
African membership in, 110, 174, 192n
Metropolitan Forensic Anthropology Team
(MFAT), 23
field assessments of burial excavations conducted
by, 10
Metropolitan Museum of Art, 334, 352
Michigan, 333, 343t
Middle Group, 96, 97, 98f101f, 102
burials belonging to, 151, 152t157t, 158f, 165f,
167f
dense and sparse areas of burials, 164
difficulty in spatial analysis, 169
grave clusters, 165169, 165f
grave markers, 166
orientation, 164, 169
children assigned to, abundance of, 116, 119
default burial assignment to, 96, 102, 105, 149,
169, 369
east-central and Lot 18 areas, 161f, 164, 168
eastern area, 162f, 164
mortuary material culture, 151, 164
buttons and fasteners, 164
coffin shape, 104, 105, 151, 166
coffin use, 164
clothing, 164, 268

jewelry, 164
pins, 164, 247
overlap with Early Group, 102
overlap with Late-Middle Group, 105
southeast area, 164, 169
west-central area, 160f, 164, 166168, 167f
western area, 159f, 164, 165166
Middle Passage, 356
Millennium Hilton Hotel, 375
Miller, William, 64
Mississippi, 343
Montgomerie Ward, 46f, 194
Montressor, John, 69f
Montserrat, 354
Moravia, 331
Moravian Church
African burials within cemetery of, 37n, 174
African membership in, 110
Morris Street, 35
mortality rates, 113t, 206
children and infants, 116, 119, 131
disease as a cause of, 73n, 112, 131, 206, 374
effects on African Burial Ground population, 73
high frequency of winter deaths, 205
in New York among Africans, 73, 73n, 112, 132t
in New York among Europeans, 112
in Philadelphia among Africans, 73, 112
in Philadelphia among Europeans, 112
seasonal mortality, 112 (see also orientation of
burials: seasonal mortality, in relation to)
based on pollen analysis, 113, 114t
See also population counts
mortuary material culture. See under Early Group;
Late Group; Late-Middle Group; Middle Group
mortuary population. See burial population of the
mortuary practices. See entries for burial practices
of Africans
mortuary program. See burial practices, evidence
of, at the New York African Burial Ground: burial
program, possible
Mother Delois Blakely. See Blakely, Mother Delois
Mother Zion, 65
Mozambique, 341
Mrs. Buchnerds Plan, 44, 47f, 67, 129
Mulberry Street, 270
Mller, Reverend Willhelm
observations on African culture, 330
Municipal Archives of the City of New York, 53n
414 Index
Munsee, 43n
music and dance, 62, 65, 150, 330
Muslim. See Islam
mutual aid associations, 57, 217
in Africa, 62
Nagel family, 329

National Environmental Policy Act, 1. See also
Section 106 compliance
National Historic Landmark. See African Burial
Ground National Historic Landmark
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), 1. See
also Section 106 compliance
National Park Service, 28, 31, 287, 331n
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)
features and materials in the African Burial
Ground eligible for listing, 3
New York African Burial Grounds eligibility, 5
Native Americans, 150n
anxiety over possibility of attack by, 40
consumers of adornments, 343, 343t
insufficient evidence for burial attributes within
the African Burial Ground, 43n
interpreters to, 191 (see also Roeloff, Sara)
possible restrictions on the burials of, 43
possible use of the African Burial Ground, 43n
restrictions on property ownership by (see Act
for Preventing Suppressing and Punishing the
other Slaves, An)
trade with, 330, 333
use of red ocher, 125n
See also Iroquois; Lenape; Munsee; Seneca
Neau, Elias, 110
organization of a school for enslaved Africans, 43,
129
Negro Burying Place, 44, 47f, 129. See also
Negroes Burial Ground, 40, 368. See also African
Burial Ground
Negroes Burying Ground, 42, 54f, 88. See also
Negros Burial Ground, 48, 75t. See also African
Burial Ground
Negros Buriel Ground, 50f, 87. See also African
Burial Ground
Negro Election Day, 150
Netherlands, 64, 330, 331, 357
New Amsterdam, 36f, 38, 58, 59, 60, 128, 214, 368,
371
name change to New York, 42

public burial grounds within, 35, 36f, 37, 64
See also New York City
New England, 150
New Jersey, 35, 191, 192, 330. See also burial sites
for Africans: in New Jersey
New Netherland, 60, 150
New Netherland Council
petition to, 1644 (for release from servitude to the
Dutch West India Company), 38n
See also New York City Common Council
New Orleans, 64
Newport, 65
New South Associates, 26n, 32t
macrobotanic, palynology, and parasitology pilot
studies, 26, 27
newspapers in New York, 64n, 76, 192, 269
clothing descriptions in runaways advertisements,
269270, 272t282t, 323n, 328
See also Daily Advertiser; New York Gazette
Newton Plantation, 66
Newton Plantation cemetery, 107, 110n, 354
artifacts as possible evidence for divination, 324
disturbances to, 110n
See also under beads; burial practices of Africans,
in the West Indies; coffins, in the West Indies
New York African Burial Ground, 68f
areas that suffered damage to burials, 80
areas with minimal construction and development,
71, 74
boundaries of, 367
burials and site features within, 89f
fill, determing depth of, during excavation, 3, 76
largest excavated African cemetery from colonial
America, 367
location, 1, 2f, 71, 71f, 72f, 77f, 78f, 79f, 367
publicly accessible areas, 367
size estimates of area excavated and investigated
archaeologically, 73, 75
vandalism, 186, 239
New York African Burial Ground History Team,
5960
New York African Burial Ground Project, 1, 5, 27,
260, 367368, 368n, 375, 376
future research, 373374
See also excavation; New York African Burial
Ground; reinterment
New York City, 1, 2f, 45f, 68f, 344
households with unfree Africans, 38, 38t, 194,
194f
public burial grounds within, 35, 36f, 37, 64
Index 415
See also burial sites for Africans: in New
York; churches in New York; development
and construction in New York; Long Island;
Manhattan; mortality rates: in New York among
Africans; mortality rates: in New York among
Europeans; New Amsterdam; newspapers in
New York; population counts: Africans in New
York
New York City Common Council
fees charged for grave digging, 64
lease of a parcel in or near the African Burial
Ground to Van Vleck children, 48
ordering of low-lying lots to be filled in, in New
York, 75
petition to, 1723 (by Jacobus Kip for assistance in
surveying the Van Borsum Patent property), 42,
43, 88
petition to, 1753 (for trade in land by John Teller,
Jacobus Stoutenburgh, and Maria Van Vleck),
48
petition to, 1784 and 1787 (to lay out and regulate
streets through the Van Borsum Patent), 52
petition to, 1787 (by free and enslaved Africans to
stop dissection of African corpses), 52, 52n, 74,
192193
petition to, 1794 (for aid in purchasing a piece of
ground for interments of Africans), 53, 53n, 74
petition to, 1795 (by the African Society regarding
the management of the African cemetery at
Chrystie Street), 53, 53n, 55, 5758, 57f
restrictions on Africans activities (see enslaved
Africans in New York: restriction on the
activities of)
See also New Netherland Council
New York City Landmarks Preservation
Commission (LPC), 3, 5, 30
New York County, 1, 60t, 367
New York Gazette, 44, 64, 132t, 269270
establishment of, 269
information on New Yorks commercial world,
269
Niger Delta, 64, 66. See also African origins of
enslaved Africans in New York: Niger Delta
Nigeria, 63
North America, 330, 332, 353, 362, 373. See also
burial practices of Africans, in North America;
personal adornment: places of manufacture: in
North America
North River, 38. See also Hudson River
North Ward, 46f, 71f
Norway (African runaway), 284, 276t
occupations of Africans, 128n, 191

carpentry, 64, 214, 216217
coopering, 64, 128n
grave digger-sextons, 6465, 192
pilots, 191192
sailors, 291, 332
teamsters, 191
See also funeral inviters
occupations in New York
cabinetmakers, 58, 64, 214, 214n, 215, 216
carpenters, 64, 214, 216, 270, 344
coffin makers, 142, 215, 218, 220
jewelers, 333, 343
joiners, 64, 214, 214n, 232
silversmiths, 321, 333, 343, 344
undertakers, 214, 214n, 259
See also funeral inviters; grave digger-sextons
Office of Public Education and Interpretation
(OPEI), 43n, 282t, 368n
Old Slip Market, 283
orientation of burials
alignment to physical features, 205
alignment to the position of the sun, 164, 169
Almshouse, as a possible reference, 113
Broadway as a possible reference, 113
at Carters Grove, 115
ditches as a possible reference, 169, 185186
fence lines, as a possible reference, 164, 166, 205
grave markers as a possible reference, 142, 184,
372
head to north, 111, 142
head to south, 90, 111, 123, 146
head to west, 109, 111, 169
Lot 12, as a possible reference, 114
palisade wall in New Amsterdam/New York, as a
possible reference, 113, 114, 164, 169
pottery waste area as a possible reference, 113,
169
seasonal mortality, in relation to, 112113, 114t
slope of the landscape as a possible reference,
113, 114, 143, 146, 205
southwesterly, 164, 169, 209, 210f
See also burial practices, evidence of, at the New
York African Burial Ground: grave orientation;
distribution of graves
Out Ward, 150
palisade wall in New Amsterdam/New York, 42,

44n, 48, 48n, 50f, 88
416 Index
overlap with Van Borsum Patent, 44
as a possible southern boundary for the African
Burial Ground, 44, 7071, 149
the palisade wall in New Amsterdam/New York
orientation of burials: palisade wall in New
Amsterdam/New York, as a possible reference;
Wall Street
Parker, James, 57f, 269
Park Row, 129, 149
Pearl Street, 149
Peg (African with buttons on clothing), 279t, 283n
Pensacola, 343t
Perris Map (1853), 77f
personal adornment, 343f, 370
age estimates, 342
burials with, 321, 321n, 322t323t
adults, 325, 327328
children and infants, 323, 325, 325n, 328
middle-aged adults, 323
problematic cases, 322t323t, 328
characteristics and types
cuff-link face, 321, 327, 341, 342, 347f
decorative items, 344
jewelry (necklaces, rings), 321, 324, 327328,
341, 343t, 345f346f
Masonic symbols, 344
paste jewelry, 30t, 322t, 324, 325, 332, 333, 341,
342343, 343t
perishable items, 321, 323, 323n, 324
in Charleston, 321
confiscation of, 332
costs of, 321, 330, 333, 342
in Philadelphia, 321, 343
places of manufacture, 342343
in Africa, 341
in Europe, 332
locally made, 321, 333
in North America, 342343, 343t, 344
places of sale in New York, 333, 344
acquirement in Africa, 333
acquirement in the Caribbean, 332
own-account economic activity, 332333
received as gifts, 333
social uses
as a cultural practice, 329, 330, 331
as a form of resistance, 328
as maintaining family ties, 329
See also Atlantic trade: beads; beads; cowrie shells
personal adornment of Africans, in New York

head decorations, 324
jewelry, 321
shoe decorations, 324
Philadelphia, 65, 284, 344, 354. See also under
mortality rates; personal adornment
Philips, Thomas, 331
Pieters, Solomon, 40n
Pinkster, 150, 150n
pins, 109, 115116, 259f, 370
burials with, 249t256t, 258t
adults, 247, 248t, 258
age and sex distribution, 247248, 248t, 256t,
258t
children, 247, 248, 248t, 257f, 258
frequencies, 256t, 265
locations, 248, 249t256t, 257f, 258, 258t, 260,
263
manufacture, 263
measurements, 260, 261f
possible theft, 259
through purchase at shops and markets, 258, 259
use of, as a cultural practice, 248, 248n
use of, as shrouding fasteners, 247, 248, 258
pipes and pipe smoking, 94, 357f
age estimates, 358
burials with, 357, 357n
in Elmina, Ghana, 357
locations, 357, 358f
pipe notch dentition, as evidence of pipe smokers,
357
places of manufacture, 357n
in Britain, 357, 358
in the Netherlands, 357
in Seville Plantation, Jamaica, 357
unused pipes as burial artifacts, 357
Pipes, Marie Lorraine, 26
pollen analyses, 27, 67, 67n, 70, 146
honewort, 365366, 366t
possible floral tributes, 120, 208, 365, 366t, 370
seeds, 28t, 32t, 365, 365n
See also artifacts in direct association with burial
remains: floral tributes; mortality rates: seasonal
mortality: based on pollen analysis
Pompey (African runaway), 270, 284, 324
population counts
Africans in New York, 38, 38n, 60, 60t, 133t,
151t, 174, 175t, 193, 367
Africans in South Carolina, 367
age distribution, 133t, 151t, 175t, 193t
Index 417
British occupation of New York, effect of, 73n
children and infants, 73n, 151, 175t, 193t, 194
enslaved Africans in New York, 60, 133t, 194
counted separately from free blacks, 60
Europeans in New York, 131, 174, 193
free Africans in New York, 60
possibly counted with white populations, 194
importation of Africans, effects of, 73n, 151
Native Americans in New York, 131, 133t
Revolutionary War as a cause for fluctuations, 60,
193
sex ratios, 131, 133t, 151t, 175t, 193t
women, preponderance of, before and after
Revolutionary War, 194
See also burial population of the New York
African Burial Ground: population estimates of;
mortality rates
Portuguese, 60, 332
postinterment rituals, 66, 122
Pot Bakers Hill, 67, 69f, 79f, 87, 92, 169, 363
pottery factories, 3n, 44, 51f, 82, 91, 92, 368
estimated date by which operations began, 104
first pottery works, 48n
as a possible eastern boundary for the African
Burial Ground, 70
unidentified building on Maerschalk and Ratzer
Plans as possible pottery works, 48, 50f, 87
pottery within graves and burial grounds, 30, 44,
149
areas with concentrated pottery waste, 92, 133
creamware, 93, 94t, 102, 103, 169
difference in wares from other New York sites, 92
pearlware, 93, 94t, 102, 103, 103n, 145, 204, 205
redware, 9293, 92n, 93n
stoneware, 30, 42, 73, 82, 87, 9293, 103104,
105, 146, 169
powder house, 49f, 50f, 69f, 129, 150
powder magazine, 44
Presbyterians, 129
preservation and decomposition of artifacts, 3, 120,
132
animal bones in grave-shaft fill, 103n
buttons, cuff links, and aglets, 265, 285, 308
factors influencing decomposition, 8385, 131,
132
buttons and fasteners, 298, 299, 308, 309
environmental conditions, 8385
pins, 247, 260
relation to burials without artifacts, 84
grave markers, 122
pins, 116, 116n, 175, 247
presence or absence based on preservation

assessment, 84, 85
textiles and clothing, 263, 265
preservation and decomposition of human remains,
3, 85t
adults, 107, 187, 189
children and infants, 107, 119, 204n
disarticulation of skeleton as a result of
decomposition process, 209n
factors influencing decomposition, 8385, 96,
103, 103n, 131
environmental conditions, 83
pollutants, effects on burial contents, 84
relation to spatial distribution of Middle Group
Burials, 164
Prince (African refused Freemason membership),
344
Prince Hall, 344
privateering, 268
captured Africans from Portuguese privateers, 60
captured Africans from Spanish privateers, 60
pseudomorphs. See under clothing and textile
fragments
public burial grounds in New Amsterdam and New
York. See burial sites for Africans: in New York;
New Amsterdam: public burial grounds within;
New York City: public burial grounds within
Quakers, 37, 129
Ranelagh Gardens, 69f, 149

Ratzer, Bernard, 51f
Ratzer Map (1767), 48, 51f, 72f, 87, 88, 88f, 173
Reade, Joseph, 283
Reade Street, 1, 2f, 8, 44, 52, 56f, 68f, 79f
construction of, 74, 75t
history of, 75t
Reade Street
reburial. See reinterment
red ocher. See under burial practices, evidence of,
at the New York African Burial Ground; Native
Americans
Reed Street. See Reade Street
Reformed Dutch Church, 62n, 129
African membership, 38t, 112
marriages and baptisms of Africans in, 37
as a possible site for African burials, 37, 149
418 Index
reinterment, 1, 375376
beads and adornment, 334, 342
burial artifacts, 24, 27 2930, 245, 351, 351n, 359,
364
clothing related items, 287
cowrie shells, 341
materials to be reburied, determination of, 30
pins, 247, 262, 263
pipes, 357, 359
procession of the coffins, 375f
retained artifacts, 31, 351n
skeletal remains, 3, 27, 30, 245, 367, 368
religion
holidays, 150
in New York, 149, 150
religious practices of Africans, in Africa, 62
location of cemeteries near water, 368n
as preparation for revolt, 130131
Remmey Pottery, 49f, 92, 149, 173, 363, 368
replication of artifacts. See artifacts in direct
association with burials: replication of
Republican Alley, 2f, 5f, 56f, 77f, 83f, 133, 166, 167
clearing for archaeological excavation, 8
filling in of, 75, 75t
history of, 75t
intact burials within, 3, 7677
minimal construction damage within, 3
opportunities to examine grave markers and tops
of graves, 81
research design, 5n, 6
lack of acceptable, 3
public engagement, 5
topics of concern to the New York African
community, 5
See also excavation; Secretary of the Interiors
Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological
Documentation; Section 110 Guidelines
resistance to bondage, 5, 6, 368. See also personal
adornment: social uses: as a form of resistance
revolt as a form of African resistance, 58. See also
Great Conspiracy of 1741; 1712 Uprising
Revolutionary War, 35, 52, 53f, 64, 87, 92, 367, 369
as a cause for the preponderance of burials of
men, 191, 370
disruption in New York as a result of, 191192
effect on the placement of burials, 120, 213
starting date of, 173
See also coffins, absence of: possible explanations
for: as a result of the Revolutionary War;
population counts: Revolutionary War as a cause
for fluctuations
Richmond, 65
rings. See personal adornment: characteristics and
types: jewelry
Rites of Ancestral Return, 375
Robertson, Archibald, 69f
Robinson and Pidgeon Atlas (1893), 78f
Rochester, 343, 343t
Rochester Museum and Science Center, 343
Roeloff, Sara, 40, 42, 43, 52
lots assigned to heirs of, 56f
ownership of Van Borsum Patent, 42
Roos, Gerrit, 40
Roos, Peter, 40
ropewalk, 44, 45f, 71f
Rosedale, Susannah, 37
runaways, 191, 270, 323
advertisements for, 269270, 283284
clothing worn, 272t282t, 321, 323, 323n, 328
black refugees in New York during British
occupation, 191, 192, 193, 194, 204, 213, 349,
370, 372
disguised clothing, 324, 328, 332
running away to visit family, 328
See also Andrew; Fanny; Sal; Suck; Tom; York
Rutgers, Anthony, 40, 44
acquirement of Kalck Hook Farm lots, 44n
draining of the Kalck Hook Farm, 70, 70n
purchase of Lot 2 of Kalck Hook Farm, 43
structure on Maerschalk Plan as a possible house
leased out by, 48
See also New York City Common Council:
petition to, 1723
Rutgers family, 40, 72f, 102
property of, 48, 49f, 88, 191, 192
Rutgers Farm, 192
Sakalava, 63
Sal (African runaway), 270, 276t
Sanborn Map, 68f
Sanders, Manuel, 40n
Sandy, William, 26, 26n
Sandy Hook, 8
Sankofa symbol. See under unique and unusual
burials: coffins
Santa Rosa, 343t
Santome, Christoffel, 40n
Sarah (domestic worker with homespun and satin
clothing), 283
Sawkill, 35
Scandrett, William, 285
Index 419
Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture,
27, 31
seasonal mortality and interment. See under
mortality rates; orientation of burials
Secretary of the Interiors Standards and Guidelines
for Archaeological Documentation, 3
Section 106 compliance, 1, 3
Section 110 Guidelines, 3
seeds. See under pollen analyses
Selyns, Henricus, 35
Seneca, 343, 343t
Senegambia, 63. See also African origins of
enslaved Africans in New York: Senegambia
September11, 2001, 1, 5, 2830
loss of artifact photographs, 27, 28t, 342
loss of artifacts, 26n, 29, 328, 351, 351n, 355,
356, 357, 357n, 359n, 362, 364, 364n, 365n
artifacts not recovered, 32t
coffin hardware, 239, 245
coffin paint samples, 243n, 245
coffin screws, 232, 233, 238t, 245
loss of excavation records, 30
recovery of artifacts, 29, 245, 351n
1712 Uprising, 43, 130
Seventh Ward, 55
Seven Years War, 173, 343
Seville Plantation, 357, 361
Sharpe, John, 35, 44
account on African burial practices in New York,
43, 58
shells and coral, 356f, 371
burials with, 349, 349n, 350t351t, 354
iron, pairing with, in some burial artifacts, 239
locations within burials, 355356, 355f
places of origin, 356, 356n
Siderastrea siderea, coral identified as, 356
social uses
as fashion trends in Africa, 356
personal adornment, used in, 355
symbolic use in burials, 355
See also cowrie shells
Shreve, Thomas, 64, 210n
shrouding and winding sheets, 6, 62, 63, 109, 205,
258, 262f, 263
in Africa, 116
chin cloths, 257, 258
distinction between shroud and winding sheet,
63n, 259
pins as a diagnostic indicator, 109, 115116, 126,
257, 325
prohibitions on, 260, 260n (see also Act for

Burying in Woollen)
provision and acquirement, 63, 213, 259, 260, 269
shroud pins, 116, 247, 296, 328
types of cloth used, 260, 260n
See also under burial practices of Africans, in
New York; burial practices of Europeans; Islam
Siderastrea siderea. See under shells and coral
Sierra Leone, 63
Sierra LeoneLiberia, 66. See also African origins
of enslaved Africans in New York: Sierra Leone
Liberia
silversmithing. See under occupations in New York
Sixth Avenue. See Avenue of the Americas
slave trade. See trade in enslaved Africans
slavery. See labor of enslaved Africans
smallpox
deaths from, 132t
in New York City, 44, 131
Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in
Foreign Parts, 43
soil samples. See under excavation; inventory of
excavations
South America, 374
South Asia, 331
South Carolina, 282, 328. See also population
counts: Africans in South Carolina
South Street Seaports laboratory, 24
Spain, 331, 332
Spanish, 60, 150n, 333, 343t
St. Annes Church, 240, 354
St. Augustine, 343t
St. Georges Chapel, 53, 55f, 65, 174, 194
St. Marks Church, 35
stoneware. See under inventory of excavations; Van
Borsum Patent; pottery within graves and burial
grounds
storage of artifacts and remains, 22, 25, 26
by Artex, 29, 32t, 262, 287, 334, 341, 342, 351,
359
Block 154 excavations, 24n
Block 160 excavations, 24n
Five Points Site excavations, 24n
Foley Square Project excavations, 24n
by Historic Conservation and Interpretation, 22, 24
by John Milner Associates, 22
by Lehman Laboratory, 10, 26
nonskeletal retained collection of artifacts, 31,
263, 351n
in the Schomburg Center for Research in Black
Culture, 27, 31
420 Index
in South Street Seaports laboratory, 24
in the World Trade Center, 25, 26, 244
Stoutenburgh, Jacobus, 48
Stouthoff, Elbert, 42
St. Pauls Church, 53f, 69f, 174
St. Philips Church, 65, 374
stratigraphy and spatial patterning of burials. See
indicators of: stratigraphy and spatial analysis of
burials; distribution of burials
Stuyvesant, Peter, 35
relocation of Africans by, 40
Stuyvesants bowery, 35, 42
Styx River, 353
Suck (African runaway), 270, 274t
Syracuse University, 334, 358
talismans. See amulets; buttons and fasteners: as

talismans or mementos
Tamboer, Pieter, 40n
tanneries, 49f, 69f, 70n, 87
faunal waste within graves and burial grounds, 30,
82, 87, 9192, 91f, 102, 303, 307, 359
diagnostic indicators of: faunal remains,
presence or absence of; impacts to graves and
burial grounds: tannery waste; inventory of
excavations: animal bone; preservation and
decomposition of artifacts: animal bones in
grave-shaft fill
Tappan, 330
Taylor-Roberts Plan (1797), 59f, 192
Teller, Isaac
construction and destruction of a fence within the
African Burial Ground, 48, 52
houses built and deconstructed within the vicinity
of the African Burial Ground, 48, 48n, 52, 173,
191, 192
Teller, John, 48
construction of a fence within the African Burial
Ground, 88, 92
fees charged for burials, 90, 102
ownership of land within African Burial Ground,
88
See also Teller phase
Teller, William, 42
Teller family, 56f
Teller phase, 88, 90, 102
temporal grouping, 87, 97, 98f101f, 102, 369
adult and subadult distribution, comparison of, 119f
based on coffinless burials, 123

based on coffin shape, 97, 215, 217218, 218n
based on datable artifacts, 93, 102, 103, 105, 185,
191
based on spatial location, 213
based on stratigraphy, 9596, 102, 103, 105, 173,
185, 191, 369
children, 96, 105
disturbed burials, 103
east-central area, 100f
eastern area, 101f
isolate burials, 96, 105
nonburial features used for chronology, 87
overlap between groups, 102, 105, 173
problematic assignments, 96
western area, 98f
western-central area, 99f
diagnostic indicators of; Early Group; Late
Group; Late-Middle Group; Middle Group
terminus ante quem (TAQ). See under burial dates
and sequence of interment, diagnostic indicators
of
terminus post quem (TPQ). See under burial dates
and sequence of interment, diagnostic indicators
of
Tom (African runaway), 284, 323
trade in enslaved Africans
demand for children, 174
direct importation of enslaved Africans, 60, 130,
174
as a possible result of the Great Conspiracy
of 1741, 151, 151n
importations to New York, 129130, 130t, 151
increase in trade as a result of Industrial
Revolution, 173
See also African origins of enslaved Africans in
New York; Atlantic trade; Caribbean: as a slavetrade connection between Africa and New York;
Middle Passage; West Indian origins of enslaved
Africans in New York
trans-Saharan trade
beads, 331
cowries, 331
Trinity Anglican Church, 35, 37f, 52, 58n, 64, 66,
112
African burials within, 174 (see also Beeling,
Abraham; Mary; van Guinea, Mareitje)
African membership, 174
ban on African burials, 35, 37, 38, 42, 43
establishment of a burial site for Africans, 52
Index 421
Trinity Church African cemetery, 52, 192
closure of, 58n
survey, and division into lots, 52, 58n
Trinity Lutheran Church
African burials within, 37n, 149, 174
Tweed Courthouse, 71n, 78f
Twi, 186, 240
290 Broadway site, 1, 1n, 3, 3n, 5, 8, 83, 85n, 367
construction of, 7f, 80, 82, 369
location, 77f, 78f, 79f
undertakers. See under occupations in New York

unique and unusual burials
coffins, 186188
coffin handles (Burial 176), 187, 187f, 242f, 245
coffin paint (Burials 159, 183, 213, and 313),
207208, 208n, 239, 241, 241n, 243
decorations with tacks (Burials 101, 176, 222,
and 332), 175, 185, 186, 186f, 187, 187f,
239241, 328, 372, 372n
possible initials HW and number 38 (Burial
332), 185, 188, 188f, 240241, 243f, 328
Sankofa symbol (Burial 101), 175, 186, 239240,
240f, 241f, 372, 372f, 372n
unique coffin construction, 209
dismemberment (Burials 151, 196, and 364),
209210, 209f, 210f
disposition of bones (Burial 196), 208209, 209f,
210f
dissection (Burials 323 and 364), 210, 211f
easterly orientation (Burials 183, 323, 392, and
406), 171, 188, 207, 257f, 314f, 327
empty-coffin burials (Burials 74, 129, and 404), 8,
9t, 147148, 171
evidence of a violent death (Burials 196 and 364),
209210
with a shared grave (Burial 25 atop Burial 32),
169, 170f
isolated burials (Burials 307 and 308), 146147
secondary burials (Burials 247 and 213; Burials
175 and 257), 147, 147f, 148, 171, 171f
southerly orientation (Burials 383 and 365), 123,
171, 355
and coffinless (Burials 237/264, 307, and 308),
133, 135, 146147
southwesterly orientation (Burial 151), 209, 210f
triple grave (Burials 142, 144, and 149), 171172,
172f
wooden grave marker (Burial 194), 208, 208f,
226f, 370
United Lutheran Church, 37n, 174

U.S. Customs Laboratory, 244, 342
Van Borsum, Cornelis, 39f

land granted to, 40
Van Borsum family, 48. See also African Burial
Ground: survey of, by Van Borsum Patent heirs
Van BorsumKalck Hook Farm boundary. See
Kalck Hook FarmVan Borsum boundary
Van Borsum Patent, 39f, 41f, 43, 48, 90, 149
area included in the African Burial Ground
landmark designation, 73
boundary with Kalck Hook Farm (see African
Burial Ground: fence lines within; Kalck Hook
FarmVan Borsum boundary)
houses built, leased, and occupied within, 42, 48
location and description, 42
overlap with the African Burial Ground, 40, 50f,
368
overlap with New Amsterdam/New York palisade
wall, 44
ownership of the land, 42, 52, 88, 173
possible northern boundary of, 50f, 51f
stoneware pottery, land leased for, 42
survey and division into lots, 53, 74, 75t, 87, 192
vandalism. See under New York African Burial
Ground
van Guinea, Mareitje, 37n
Van Vleck, Abraham, 44, 48
ownership of land on Carwitham Plan, 44
possible lease of pottery to William Crolius, 44
Van Vleck, Maria, 44, 48, 48n
Van Vleck family, 56f
Varick Street, 38
vaults, burial, 65, 174, 192n, 215, 222, 226n, 373
Vauxhall Gardens, 149
Venice, 331, 333, 334, 339, 340
Vigne, Jan, 40
Virginia, 217, 328, 332
Wall Street, 35, 36f, 62, 375f. See also palisade

wall in New Amsterdam/New York
Walton, William, 64
wards, 45f, 72f. See also Montgomerie Ward; North
Ward; Seventh Ward; West Ward
War for Independence. See Revolutionary War
Warren Street, 149
Washington Heights, 329
Webber, Wolfort, 40
422 Index
Wells, Obadiah, 270
West Africa, 65, 109, 270n, 331, 331n, 354, 356,
357, 363, 372
West Central Africa, 60, 240, 331n, 332t, 354, 363,
368n, 372n
West Houston Street, 38
West Indian origins of enslaved Africans in New
York, 60, 130t. See also African origins of
enslaved Africans in New York; Caribbean: as
slave trade connection between West Central
Africa and New York; trade in enslaved Africans
West Ward, 46f, 71f
White, Blanche, 214n, 259
Whitefield, George, 149, 150
Whiteman, Henry, 284
Whydah, 331
Williamsburg, 226n. See also College Landing site
Williams, Peter, Sr., 65, 192n
Windmill, the, 42
Windward Coast, 332t
Wolof, 63
women, 63, 265, 268, 332

distinctive graves of, 123, 125127, 125f, 126f
wood samples. See excavation: coffin wood
samples taken; laboratory analysis: coffin wood
samples
World Trade Center, 1, 5, 30, 32t33t, 351n
collapse of, 26n, 27, 28, 142, 239, 243n, 245, 313,
328, 342, 351, 356, 357n, 359, 362, 365n
as a laboratory facility for excavations, 23, 24,
24n, 26, 358
Yates, Thomas, 285

yellow fever, 206, 374
York (African runaway), 270
Zanzibar, 341
Zenger, John Peter, 269
The
New York
AfricAN
BuriAl
GrouNd
U.S. General Services Administration
Vol. 2
The Archaeology of the New York African Burial Ground

Part I
Editors: Perry, Howson, and Bianco
iSBN: 0-88258-254-2
9 780882 582542
HOWARD
UNIVERSITY
The New York AfricAN BuriAl GrouNd:

unearthing the African Presence in colonial New York
Volume 2
The Archaeology of the

Part I
Editors: Warren R. Perry, Jean Howson, and Barbara A. Bianco

The Archaeology of The NYABG

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

The Archaeology of The NYABG

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

The

U.S. General Services Administration

The Archaeology of the New York African Burial Ground

Editors: Perry, Howson, and Bianco

The New York AfricAN BuriAl GrouNd:

The Archaeology of the

Editors: Warren R. Perry, Jean Howson, and Barbara A. Bianco

Director for Archaeology

The New York African Burial Ground

African Burial Ground Project

The Early Group.......................................................................................................................................................................103

The Southeast Area.................................................................................................................................................................169

The New York African Burial Ground

Lower Manhattan locator map: African Burial Ground excavation site.........................................................................2

XII List of Figures

Figure 33. Site location overlaid on the Maerschalk Plan (1754)................................................................................................72

List of Figures XIII

Figure 70. Adult sex distribution, Early Group...........................................................................................................................141

XIV List of Figures

Figure 102. Burial 183: in situ photograph of exposed coffin lid.................................................................................................208

Figure 146. Burial 6: gilt, copper-alloy button (anchor device)....................................................................................................292

XVI List of Figures

Figure 190. Burial 313: bone button, with offset rim..................................................................................................................307

List of Figures XVII

Figure 234. Bead Type 5.............................................................................................................................................................337

XVIII List of Figures

Figure 278. Burial 48: X-ray of knife blade..................................................................................................................................362

The New York African Burial Ground

Table 1. Assigned Burial Numbers with No Discrete Human Remains Associated.........................................................................9

Table 34. Coffin Shape, by Age Category....................................................................................................................................218

The New York African Burial Ground

The New York African Burial Ground: Unearthing

O. Jackson Cole, Ph.D.

James A. Donaldson, Ph.D.

New York, were edited according to the conventions of

The Howard University Archaeology Team is grateful

generosity, encouragement, and resolve have been a

of coral specimens from the African Burial Ground.

In 1992, I received a phone call from my friend and

kingdom was part of a series of responses to havoc

night I was awakened by a knock at the door of my

Egunfemi Adegbolola, Chief Alagba of New York,

Burial Ground site. I stood on the sacred ground that

This volume is one of three disciplinary volumes on

Project Background and

2 Jean Howson, Leonard G. Bianchi, and Warren R. Perry

The New York African Burial Ground

May 1991 revealed the presence of intact burials at

4 Jean Howson, Leonard G. Bianchi, and Warren R. Perry

The New York African Burial Ground

6 Jean Howson, Leonard G. Bianchi, and Warren R. Perry

ing area was halted until GSA decided to proceed

Archaeological testing commenced in May 1991 in

Survey and Mapping

Figure 3. Backhoe clearing adjacent to temporary archaeological

Figure 4. Excavation shelter erected to allow night and winter work

Figure 5. Archaeologists working under lights. Teams of two worked

Figure 6. Construction of the 290 Broadway Federal building during

8 Jean Howson, Leonard G. Bianchi, and Warren R. Perry

site clearing was accomplished under less than optimal

Burial Identification and Numbering

Table 1. Assigned Burial Numbers with No Discrete Human Remains Associated

Explanation for Lack of Human Remains